Liberty & Power: Group Blog
Also in California, the state assembly acted tolerantly when it passed a medical marijuana employment rights bill. The law came in response to a decision by the State Supreme Court that employers could fire an employee for failing a drug test even though he or she legally possessed marijuana and used it for health reasons. To assume that someone who uses marijuana will be a poor worker and cause problems at the job site is both unjust and unfounded.
Next, in Hawaii the Aloha State's Big Island Hawaii County Council did its constituents a huge favor by rejecting $441,000 in state and federal funds to continue “Green Harvest” a marijuana eradication program. Not only did their own budget increase by $53,000 but they ended a widely despised program which drew numerous complaints from it inception. The Drug War Chronicle citing critics points out that, “low-flying helicopters searching for pot fields disrupted rural life and invaded their privacy. Others argued that the program has done little to eradicate marijuana and even promoted the use of other, more dangerous drugs.”
Lastly, in the Sun Valley town of Hailey, Idaho the population passed initiatives legalizing medical marijuana, legalizing industrial hemp and requiring city law enforcement to make marijuana arrests the department's lowest priority. These measures had passed in November but town officials would not enforce them. The Idaho Liberty Lobby organized the campaign on the theory that it would be harder for the politicians to ignore the will of the people when expressed twice.
The Drug War Chronicle is an essential publication for understanding the war on people who us certain kinds of drugs. You can subscribe to the e-mail edition here and you can support the work of the vital organization, DRCNet, behind it here.
Cross posted at The Trebach Report
I ponder such questions in my op-ed, "Can You Really Love Your Country?" at The Future of Freedom Foundation website.
David T. Beito
Our intention was to provide an opportunity for traditional schools, many of which we know have trouble affording athletic equipment, to win equipment. Our intent was certainly not to exclude homeschooled children from the opportunity to win prizes and benefit from better access to fitness equipment.
To address the inadvertent limitation of our current contest and provide an opportunity for even more kids to improve their fitness, we will soon create an additional contest in which homeschooled students will be encouraged to participate. When the kids win, everyone wins!
Kudos to Subway.
Aeon J. Skoble
Scholars for Peace in the Middle East (SPME) has responded by emphasizing and updating its petition which now states: "We are academics, scholars, researchers and professionals of differing religious and political perspectives. We all agree that singling out Israelis for an academic boycott is wrong. To show our solidarity with our Israeli academics in this matter, we, the undersigned, hereby declare ourselves to be Israeli academics for purposes of any academic boycott. We will regard ourselves as Israeli academics and decline to participate in any activity from which Israeli academics are excluded.” If you have not done so yet you can sign it here.
Cross posted on The Trebach Report
The artistic elite partyed like there would be no tomorrow."It was only in the course of those nights that I discovered the true meaning of the word party," was how Simone de Beauvoir put it. Jean-Paul Sartre was no less enthusiastic:"Never were we as free as under the German occupation."
For another take on the book go here. You can read more about the book here. And to read about the author go here.
Which reminds me to recommend John Lukacs' The Last European War: September 1939-December 1941 (1976; reprint, Yale University Press, 2001) to anyone interested in reading about a time when most Europeans thought Hitler had won and adjusted their lives accordingly.
Aeon J. Skoble
Roderick T. Long
[cross-posted at Austro-Athenian Empire]
An old joke has an alcoholic asking a priest, Is it okay for me to drink while Im praying?
Certainly not! says the priest.
Well, is it okay for me to pray while Im drinking? the alcoholic inquires.
The priest responds: Absolutely!
Im reminded of this joke by the disagreement among libertarians over the role of the LP. (See, for example, the exchange between Brad Spangler and Less Antman in the comments section of this post. In fact the present post started as a contribution to that discussion until I decided it merited a post unto itself.) Just as its good to pray while youre drinking, but bad to drink while youre praying, so its good for the libertarian movement that radicals leave the LP, but also good for the movement that the LP have radicals in it.
Let me explain both sides of the paradox. Why is it good for the movement that radicals leave the LP? Because if the best way to achieve a libertarian society is to encourage the populace (via education and counter-economics) to withdraw consent and render themselves ungovernable, thus leaving the state apparatus to collapse as opposed to seeking liberation through the state apparatus then electoral politics is a counter-productive form of education, since it instead encourages people to continue looking to electoral politics as the natural venue for political change.
Why is it good for the movement that the LP have radicals in it? Because although electoral politics should never be the primary focus of libertarian education, so long as there is a self-proclaimed libertarian political party, whatever it says or does is going to have an impact on peoples perception of libertarianism, thus making the job of education easier or harder as the case may be. A libertarian party that puts forward relatively radical/leftish candidates like Ruwart thus helps the cause of radical libertarian education more (or, if you prefer, hinders it less) in that respect, at least than a libertarian party that puts forward relatively moderate/conservative/statist candidates like Barr. (No, I dont think the adjectives moderate, conservative, and statist are interchangeable, exactly, but thats another story. Theyre all bad anyway.)
The paradox isnt a contradiction. There is a respect in which radicals help the cause of agorist education by participating in the LP. There is a different respect in which radicals help the cause of agorist education by repudiating the LP. The question is how to weigh these two respects against each other. Most participants in the dispute seem to think its obvious how to weigh them (though their answers differ), but I dont find it nearly so obvious.
To most people, the word libertarian means the Libertarian Party. One might react to this fact by feeling that it is vitally important for radicals to steer the LP in a radical direction so as to project the right image. One might instead react by feeling that it is vitally important for radicals to repudiate the LP loudly and forcefully so as to undermine the mistaken identification. I myself feel the pull of both considerations fairly strongly.
A repudiationist will argue that even if what the LP says does influence the success of agorist education, the solution is simply to abolish the LP. Maybe so, but theres no magic button that will abolish it. In any case, there are also some strategic reasons for wanting such a party around come the revolution, for reasons Ive discussed before. So I dont think the case for repudiation is ironclad.
On the other hand, I certainly dont think the case for participation is ironclad either. For one thing, theres a strong case to be made for its being impossible or at least bloody difficult for radicals to work effectively in the party. Whatever we do in the party will either succeed or fail in making the LP more popular. If it fails, then obviously whatever were doing is not effective. If it succeeds, then more people will join the party, but the likely result of that is watering down the party and moving it in a moderate direction. Arguably this is already happening.
Less sees reason for optimism in the fact that after 6 ballots 45% of the delegates still wanted an openly anarchist candidate. Yes, that is some reason for optimism. But is the party likely to get more radical or less radical after the Barr-Root campaign? What kind of people is that campaign likely to bring into the party people more likely to swell that 45% or more likely to diminish it? Surely the latter. Are there enough radicals to offset that trend if they got involved in droves? Its not obvious.
Im not arguing for any particular conclusion here. Im through with the LP for this election (itll be the first since 88 that I havent supported the presidential nominee), but Im not committed to abandoning it forever. Though Im not committed to going back either. (I let my membership lapse years ago, so I cant have the satisfaction of formally quitting to protest the Barr-Root nomination.)
The good news is that in the end I dont think that much turns on this issue. I think the pro-LP side tends to exaggerate the benefits of a libertarian political party, but I also think the agorist side tends to exaggerate the extent of harm that it does. Electoral politics is in the end peripheral to the central tasks of libertarian education and building alternative institutions.
Agorist Demerit Count: 4.5
For a bare-bones account of his life, go here. For a left-of-center appreciation of him, go here. And for a fine defense of Borah against G. W. Bush’s recent slander, go here.
What impact will Bob Barr and his VP candidate, Wayne Allen Root, have on the elections in November? What are the implications for getting libertarian ideas discussed more widely? And what impact will the Barr-Root ticket have for the Libertarian Party? What do our readers think?
Amy H. Sturgis
David T. Beito
Although libertarians wouldn't agree with everything Simon Jenkins writes here, he presents his crucial argument about the role of the price mechanism in allocating scarce resources rather well.
Roderick T. Long
[cross-posted at Austro-Athenian Empire]
Two stories for Memorial Day:
AP foreign, Monday May 19, 2008
by Charles J. Hanley and Jae-Soon Chang
Associated Press Writers
DAEJEON, South Korea (AP) Grave by mass grave, South Korea is unearthing the skeletons and buried truths of a cold-blooded slaughter from early in the Korean War, when this nations U.S.-backed regime killed untold thousands of leftists and hapless peasants in a summer of terror in 1950.
With U.S. military officers sometimes present, and as North Korean invaders pushed down the peninsula, the southern army and police emptied South Korean prisons, lined up detainees and shot them in the head, dumping the bodies into hastily dug trenches. Others were thrown into abandoned mines or into the sea. Women and children were among those killed. Many victims never faced charges or trial.
The mass executions intended to keep possible southern leftists from reinforcing the northerners were carried out over mere weeks and were largely hidden from history for a half-century. They were the most tragic and brutal chapter of the Korean War, said historian Kim Dong-choon, a member of a 2-year-old government commission investigating the killings.
Hundreds of sets of remains have been uncovered so far, but researchers say they are only a tiny fraction of the deaths. The commission estimates at least 100,000 people were executed, in a South Korean population of 20 million.
That estimate is based on projections from local surveys and is very conservative, said Kim. The true toll may be twice that or more, he told The Associated Press.
In addition, thousands of South Koreans who allegedly collaborated with the communist occupation were slain by southern forces later in 1950, and the invaders staged their own executions of rightists.
Through the postwar decades of South Korean right-wing dictatorships, victims' fearful families kept silent about that blood-soaked summer. American military reports of the South Korean slaughter were stamped secret and filed away in Washington. Communist accounts were dismissed as lies.
Only since the 1990s, and South Korea's democratization, has the truth begun to seep out.
In 2002, a typhoons fury uncovered one mass grave. Another was found by a television news team that broke into a sealed mine. Further corroboration comes from a trickle of declassified U.S. military documents, including U.S. Army photographs of a mass killing outside this central South Korean city.
Now Kims Truth and Reconciliation Commission has added government authority to the work of scattered researchers, family members and journalists trying to peel away the long-running cover-up. The commissioners have the help of a handful of remorseful old men.
Even now, I feel guilty that I pulled the trigger, said Lee Joon-young, 83, one of the executioners in a secluded valley near Daejeon in early July 1950.
The retired prison guard told the AP he knew that many of those shot and buried en masse were ordinary convicts or illiterate peasants wrongly ensnared in roundups of supposed communist sympathizers. They didnt deserve to die, he said. They knew nothing about communism.
The 17 investigators of the commission's subcommittee on mass civilian sacrifice, led by Kim, have been dealing with petitions from more than 7,000 South Koreans, involving some 1,200 alleged incidents not just mass planned executions, but also 215 cases in which the U.S. military is accused of the indiscriminate killing of South Korean civilians in 1950-51, usually in air attacks.
The commission last year excavated sites at four of an estimated 150 mass graves around the country, recovering remains of more than 400 people. Working deliberately, matching documents to eyewitness and survivor testimony, it has officially confirmed two large-scale executions at a warehouse in the central South Korean county of Cheongwon, and at Ulsan on the southeast coast.
In January, then-President Roh Moo-hyun, under whose liberal leadership the commission was established, formally apologized for the more than 870 deaths confirmed at Ulsan, calling them illegal acts the then-state authority committed.
The commission, with no power to compel testimony or prosecute, faces daunting tasks both in verifying events and identifying victims, and in tracing a chain of responsibility. Under Rohs conservative successor, Lee Myung-bak, whose party is seen as democratic heir to the old autocratic right wing, the commission may find less budgetary and political support.
The roots of the summer 1950 bloodbath lie in the U.S.-Soviet division of Japan's former Korea colony in 1945, which precipitated north-south turmoil and eventual war.
In the late 1940s, President Syngman Rhees U.S.-installed rightist regime crushed leftist political activity in South Korea, including a guerrilla uprising inspired by the communists ruling the north. By 1950, southern jails were packed with up to 30,000 political prisoners.
The southern government, meanwhile, also created the National Guidance League, a re-education organization for recanting leftists and others suspected of communist leanings. Historians say officials met membership quotas by pressuring peasants into signing up with promises of rice rations or other benefits. By 1950, more than 300,000 people were on the leagues rolls, organizers said.
North Korean invaders seized Seoul, the southern capital, in late June 1950 and freed thousands of prisoners, who rallied to the northern cause. Southern authorities, in full retreat with their U.S. military advisers, ordered National Guidance League members in areas they controlled to report to the police, who detained them. Soon after, commission researchers say, the organized mass executions of people regarded as potential collaborators began bad security risks, as a police official described the detainees at the time.
The declassified record of U.S. documents shows an ambivalent American attitude toward the killings. American diplomats that summer urged restraint on southern officials to no obvious effect but a State Department cable that fall said overall commander Gen. Douglas MacArthur viewed the executions as a Korean internal matter, even though he controlled South Koreas military.
Ninety miles south of Seoul, here in the narrow, peaceful valley of Sannae, truckloads of prisoners were brought in from Daejeon Prison and elsewhere day after day in July 1950, as the North Koreans bore down on the city.
The American photos, taken by an Army major and kept classified for a half-century, show the macabre sequence of events.
White-clad detainees bent, submissive, with hands bound were thrown down prone, jammed side by side, on the edge of a long trench. South Korean military and national policemen then stepped up behind, pointed their rifles at the backs of their heads and fired. The bodies were tipped into the trench.
Trembling policemen they hadn't shot anyone before were sometimes off-target, leaving men wounded but alive, Lee said. He and others were ordered to check for wounded and finish them off.
Evidence indicates South Korean executioners killed between 3,000 and 7,000 here, said commissioner Kim. A half-dozen trenches, each up to 150 yards long and full of bodies, extended over an area almost a mile long, said Kim Chong-hyun, 70, chairman of a group of bereaved families campaigning for disclosure and compensation for the Daejeon killings. His father, accused but never convicted of militant leftist activity, was one victim.
Another was Yeo Tae-kus father, whose wife and mother searched for him afterward.
Bodies were just piled upon each other, said Yeo, 59, remembering his mothers description. Arms would come off when they turned them over. The desperate women never found him, and the mass graves were quickly covered over, as were others in isolated spots up and down this mountainous peninsula, to be officially forgotten.
When British communist journalist Alan Winnington entered Daejeon that summer with North Korean troops and visited the site, writing of waxy dead hands and feet (that) stick through the soil, his reports in the Daily Worker were denounced as fabrication by the U.S. Embassy in London. American military accounts focused instead on North Korean reprisal killings that followed in Daejeon.
But CIA and U.S. military intelligence documents circulating even before the Winnington report, classified secret and since declassified, told of the executions by the South Koreans. Lt. Col. Bob Edwards, U.S. Embassy military attache in South Korea, wrote in conveying the Daejeon photos to Army intelligence in Washington that he believed nationwide thousands of political prisoners were executed within (a) few weeks by the South Koreans.
Another glimpse of the carnage appeared in an unofficial U.S. source, an obscure memoir self-published in 1981 by the late Donald Nichols, a U.S. Air Force intelligence officer, who told of witnessing the unforgettable massacre of approximately 1,800 at Suwon, 20 miles south of Seoul.
Such reports lend credibility to a captured North Korean document from Aug. 2, 1950, eventually declassified by Washington, which spoke of mass executions in 12 South Korean cities, including 1,000 killed in Suwon and 4,000 in Daejeon.
That early, incomplete North Korean report couldn't include those executed in territory still held by the southerners. Up to 10,000 were killed in the city of Busan alone, a South Korean lawmaker, Park Chan-hyun, estimated in 1960.
His investigation came during a 12-month democratic interlude between the overthrow of Rhee and a government takeover by Maj. Gen. Park Chung-hees authoritarian military, which quickly arrested many then probing for the hidden story of 1950.
Kim said his projection of at least 100,000 dead is based in part on extrapolating from a survey by non-governmental organizations in one province, Busans South Gyeongsang, which estimated 25,000 killed there. And initial evidence suggests most of the National Guidance League's 300,000 members were killed, he said.
Commission investigators agree with the late Lt. Col. Edwards note to Washington in 1950, that orders for execution undoubtedly came from the top, that is, President Rhee, who died in 1965.
But any documentary proof of that may have been destroyed, just as the facts of the mass killings themselves were buried. In 1953, after the war ended in stalemate, after the deaths of at least 2 million people, half or more of them civilians, a U.S. Army war crimes report attributed all summary executions here in Daejeon to the murderous barbarism of North Koreans.
Such myths survived a half-century, in part because those who knew the truth were cowed into silence.
My mother destroyed all pictures of my father, for fear the family would get an image as leftists, said Koh Chung-ryol, 57, who is convinced her 29-year-old father was innocent of wrongdoing when picked up in a broad police sweep here, to die in Sannae valley.
My mother tried hard to get rid of anything about her husband, she said. She suffered unspeakable pain.
Even educated South Koreans remained ignorant of their countrys past. As a young researcher in the late 1980s, Yonsei Universitys Park Myung-lim, today a leading Korean War historian, was deeply shaken as he sought out confidential accounts of those days from ordinary Koreans.
I cried,' he said. I felt, Oh, my goodness. Oh, Jesus. This was my country? It was true?
The Truth and Reconciliation Commission can recommend but not award compensation for lost and ruined lives, nor can it bring surviving perpetrators to justice. Our investigative power is so meager, commission President Ahn Byung-ook told the AP.
His immediate concern is resources. The current government isnt friendly toward us, and so were concerned that the budget may be cut next year, he said.
South Korean conservatives complain the truth campaign will only reopen old wounds from a time when, even at the village level, leftists and rightists carried out bloody reprisals against each other.
The life of the commission with a staff of 240 and annual budget of $19 million is guaranteed by law until at least 2010, when it will issue a final, comprehensive report.
Later this spring and summer its teams will resume digging at mass grave sites. Thus far, it has verified 16 incidents of 1950-51 not just large-scale detainee killings, but also such events as a South Korean battalions cold-blooded killing of 187 men, women and children at Kochang village, supposed sympathizers with leftist guerrillas.
By exposing the truth of such episodes, we hope to heal the trauma and pain of the bereaved families, the commission says. It also wants to educate people, not just in Korea, but throughout the international community, to the reality of that long-ago conflict, to prevent such a tragic war from reoccurring in the future.
Associated Press investigative researcher Randy Herschaft in New York contributed to this report.
by William Gillis
In 1945, as the Japanese Empire finally went into retreat, the Korean people were left without an occupational authority for the first time in decades. In that brief moment something amazing happened. The Korean Anarchists, long the champions of the resistance struggle, came out of the woodwork and formed a nationwide federation of village and workers councils to oversee a massive project of land reform. Korea graduated from feudalism overnight. Aside from some struggles with the Socialists and Nationalists, the peninsula was at peace.
When WWII concluded, however, the responsibility of securing peace and order in Korea was assigned to the Americans and Soviets. By all accounts in this instance the US actually had no imperialist intentions. While the Soviets moved quickly to deploy their forces and occupy the North, the Americans took their time showing up, and were largely content to let the South Koreans manage themselves.
The Koreans, culturally steeped with anti-authoritarian values, were fond of America and openly despised the Soviets. While a few socialists fled North hoping that the Soviets would give them a hand against the Anarchists, they were overwhelmed in numbers by a mass migration south. Everyone assumed the Americans would assist or at least respect their autonomy.
This did not last.
The Americans Military commanders who eventually arrived had trouble understanding or dealing with the anarchy they found. They had no protocol for dealing with regional federations and autonomous communes. So they helped the dispossessed aristocracy form a military government. In order to make the map simple. In order to get things under hand.
Most importantly they did not understand that the Korean Anarchists and Anti-Authoritarian activists that saturated the countryside were different than and in fact vehemently opposed to the Communists, going so far as to organized and launch insurrectionary attacks on the Soviet Occupation before the Americans arrived.
The Americans couldn't understand anarchists. But leftists, they knew, meant Soviets. And they had the gall to ignore or resist their puppet military government. So they started killing them.
By the start of the Korean War, the slaughter was in full swing. Having arrested every anarchist organizer or sympathetic peasant they could get their hands on, they started executing them en masse.
The Korean Anarchist movement was, historically, one of the strongest in the world. It survived half a century of brutal occupation and economic exploitation. It survived a three way assault by the Chinese, Japanese and Soviets. It has survived many, many massacres and exterminations. It is even still around today. So strong that in the last few years theyve been known to evict the police from the streets. But the worst injury it ever suffered was initiated and orchestrated by the United States military. In a single campaign so horrific it borders on genocide.
This was truly, objectively, one of the worst things the US has ever done. And there are some big fucking contenders.
Most north american papers ran front-page stories this Monday about the latest mass graves being uncovered while I was riding the Empire Builder from St. Paul to Portland. I found a copy wedged between Amtrak seat cushions. And there was an ancient photo of piled corpses as far as the eye could see. The papers euphemistically used the term leftists. But I know the history, I did the research.
They were almost all anarchists.
However lovely America may be. Remember, the US government is not our friend. It will never be. It can never be.