Posts in "Politics"

Re-evaluating RT

Oct 13, 2012 at 10:15 PM

CNN, FOX, NBC—we know they all have a statist, sensationalist bias. Many of my politically active friends have found Russia Today (RT) to be a great alternative news source to the obtuse, soporific string of half-truths that fashion American news.

Currently, six of my friends on Facebook have “liked” it, and many more have browsed it, read it, watched it and distributed its articles. While American news stations completely ignore the most crucial issues facing America, RT attacks everything from the United States’ involvement in Syria to novel talking street lamps recently installed in Detroit. It even provides Julian Assange an outlet to air his show, which he conducts via house arrest. Your mouths are probably watering right now.

Except, applauding RT for its “critical stances” is nothing less than absurd. Many of the same people that criticize the backgrounds of many of America’s major news stations turn around and extol the virtues of RT, without taking a minute to evaluate its very un-libertarian worldview. Russia Today is government-funded by, of course, the Russian government.

Watch YAL's Campus Debate at IUPUI Live Online TONIGHT

Oct 3, 2012 at 6:14 PM

By Bonnie Kristian

Tonight is the first presidential debate between Obama and Romney, but we're betting you'd like to see something with a little more substance...and actual disagreement.

That's why YAL is kicking off our Campus Debates series at IUPUI tonight, and you're invited! We're hosting three speakers -- one conservative, one libertarian, and one liberal -- to debate capitalism, war, the role of government, and other important issues the networks are too scared to ask about.

The debate at IUPUI is free to attend, and it starts at 6:30 tonight. It's located in IUPUI's Campus Center, MPR 450 C (map). If you're in the area, we want to see YOU there!

If you're not in Indianapolis, click here to watch a livestream of the event beginning at 6:30.

All three of tonight's speakers are true experts. This is sure to be a great debate! Take a look at our line-up:

Conservative
Dr. Richard Brake

Dr. Richard Brake is National Director of Education at the Intercollegiate Studies Institute. Brake holds undergraduate and graduate degrees in American government from Georgetown and Virginia, a Ph.D. in American politics from Temple University, and is a former ISI Weaver Fellow. Prior to coming to ISI, Dr. Brake taught American politics and worked as a legislative assistant in both the U.S. and Pennsylvania Houses of Representatives.

Libertarian
Dr. Robert Murphy

Dr. Robert Murphy is an adjunct scholar of the Mises Institute, where he teaches at the Mises Academy. Murphy completed his Bachelor of Arts in economics at Hillsdale College and his Ph.D. at NYU. He runs the blog Free Advice and is the author of The Politically Incorrect Guide to Capitalism, the Study Guide to "Man, Economy, and State with Power and Market," the "Human Action" Study Guide, The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Great Depression and the New Deal, and his newest book, Lessons for the Young Economist.

Liberal
Dr. Marc Bilodeau

Dr. Marc Bilodeau is a professor of economics at Indiana University-Purdue University-Indianapolis. He received his undergraduate degree at the Université du Québec à Montréal and his masters and doctorate at the University of Western Ontario. Professor Bilodeau’s research centers on how public goods are provided. He has been published on a variety of topics, including “Rival Charities” and “Rational Nonprofit Entrepreneurship.”

Learn more here. RSVP on Facebook here.

The True Obstacle of Liberty

Sep 25, 2012 at 5:37 PM

By Joseph Forester Warren

Together we are fighting for the ideas of liberty to replace the status quo and advance the liberties of all of man, not just those who have the deepest pockets and best connections.

There is one obstacle that stands in our path, however. This obstacle is much closer to home than most realize. This obstacle is ourselves. We have divided ourselves, and I fear that the defeat of Ron Paul for the GOP nomination is only going to accelerate the destructive affect of this divide. We have those who want to change the Republican party from within, and then we have those who want to support and advance the Libertarian party. These two strategies both have the same end goal of liberty, however they are pointlessly butting heads more and more with each passing day.

We found an open-minded philosophy, and we sullied this philosophy with immaturity and petty arguments over tactics. We have become arrogant in our thinking, and are beginning to alienate those who should be our greatest allies. We have advanced the liberty movement arguably further than it has been in over 200 years, and yet I see that we have the potential to accomplish one of two dreadfully opposite outcomes:

One: We work together to advance the liberty movement to the point where every politician in office, from the local to the federal level, is a principled and effective supporter of liberty.
Two: We stagnate the liberty movement more so than any establishment politician could ever dream of accomplishing and effectively decimate any chances of political change in the country.

How we could stagnate the liberty movement who has observed movement infighting. We slash each other's ideas, and simultaneously destroy each other's confidence in liberty.

This is not why we all joined this movement. We joined to bring real change to this country. We joined to save our society.

Ownership Society

Sep 23, 2012 at 10:05 AM

By Ethan Papaserge

Last week, I mentioned the DNC video that claimed “government is the only thing we all belong to.” First of all, this is completely antithetical to one of America’s founding principles -- that government derives powers from the consent of the governed.

Ironically, George W. Bush first coined “Ownership Society”, although the main tenets had been spoken of by conservatives for years. Cato writes:

An ownership society values responsibility, liberty, and property. Individuals are empowered by freeing them from dependence on government handouts and making them owners instead, in control of their own lives and destinies. In the ownership society, patients control their own health care, parents control their own children's education, and workers control their retirement savings.

A year before I went to college, there was a drinking death at my school. As a result, the administration decided to be very proactive in preventing future incidents. The college started such campaigns as “Civility: It’s Everyone’s Responsibility” and emphasized looking out for others, but rarely emphasized the need for self-restraint and individual responsibility. What resulted was a diffusion of responsibility, there was no ownership. Students assumed that there was always someone there to clean up the mess or take care of them.

This condition is witnessed in many situations when an individual rents a house or an item instead of owning it. With ownership comes responsibility. Responsibility and ownership has to be restored, but it has to start with the individual. Once in control of their own lives and destinies, individuals will reach to achieve the life that they desire and not wait for government and others to provide for them.

Reagan and Libertarianism

Sep 22, 2012 at 1:05 PM

By Rob Luedke

Craig Shirley, author of Rendezvous with Destiny, is a scholar who has devoted years of intensive research to the subject of Ronald Reagan. In this brief video clip, Shirley suggests that libertarianism influenced Reagan's political stances. Shirley highlights one occasion when this led Reagan to vote in opposition to other voices in the Republican party. What are your opinions on the man who became our nation's 40th president and his view that "the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism?"

I couldn't help wondering...

Sep 19, 2012 at 3:05 PM

By Nick D'Auteuil

"When I overhear my friends talking about politics without me." -- Ron Paul Problems

The other day I was thinking about how many of my friends just don't care about politics. I can understand how annoying it is to them -- dirty campaigning, endless promises never kept to one group or another, and constant solicitations from politicians who just need a few more dollars. I for whatever reason fall into that category of people who can look past all the faults and still find interest in it. And I certainly don't think that makes me better than anyone. I almost envy those that can live "blissfully ignorant" lives. Anyways I was wondering if the Founding Fathers ever experienced their friends getting upset with them for talking about politics. After all, only about 40% of the population of the colonies supported the Patriots' cause.

Super PAC App Fact Checks Ads in Real Time

Sep 12, 2012 at 12:09 PM

By Eric Sharp

1x1.trans Super PAC App Fact Checks Ads In Real Time

Justin Adelson, MIT Sloan

Political ads often bend and distort reality to achieve an end. However, emerging tools make it easier than ever to dispel confusion about political TV ads. Enter the Super PAC App: a new mobile application that gives users detailed information about political ads.

The app accomplishes this by using audio fingerprinting software to listen to the campaign ad, and then simply shows what PAC paid for it, provides verification of claims in the ad, and gives links to non-partisan sources to learn more. Users can even rate each ad by “love,” “fair,” “fishy” and “fail.” This is political technology that makes deceiving voters more difficult.

The app isn’t trying to out-perform the many “follow the money” sites like Open Secrets or Politfact. Rather it is designed to make accessing that information much easier. There are some gaps in information that can’t be bridged due to the limited information that Super PACs are required to disclose, but even with these limitations this is a significant and powerful tool.

Read the rest on IVN.

Yes, We Really ARE the Future

Sep 12, 2012 at 11:09 AM

By Eric Sharp

“We Are the Future Rally” at the Sun Dome at the University

The Sunday before the 2012 RNC, a unique political event took place. Ron Paul's "We Are The Future Rally" drew an overflow crowd of more than 10,000 young people. While the GOP Establishment was busy pushing Ron Paul's delegates to the margins with rule changes, the r3volution was making other plans.

"We Are The Future" isn't just a name; it is a declaration. What we are looking at is a "libertarian long-march," to borrow a Marxist term (it's pay back for stealing the word liberal). What this means is that liberty activists will keep pushing every way they can until a free society is achieved. Some will run for office; others will focus on education and private enterprise; but they will all do their part to fulfill the dream of living free.

Ron Paul in his address at the rally spoke of the changing of eras. This is a powerful idea that gives a broader perspective to the libertarian mission. The Progressive era of big-government corporatism is coming to an end. It is ending not just in policy, but in the hearts and minds of people everywhere. Ron Paul announced that we have already entered an age of liberty and we are just seeing the last vestiges of the old guard scrambling to prevent the inevitable.

With that in mind, take a look at this exert from a recent American Conservative article,

What the reactions to Akin’s gaffe ... expose[s] is a fear in the soul of the GOP that history is passing it by and the end may be near.

How One World Trade Center is a Fitting Tribute to the Victims of 9/11

Sep 11, 2012 at 12:09 PM

By John McKenna

Eleven years ago today, America was the victim of the most brutal terrorist attack in our history. Nearly 3,000 men, women, and children, were taken from us by “faceless cowards,” who crashed jumbo jets into the Twin Towers, the Pentagon, and western Pennsylvania (which did not meet its intended target thanks to the heroism of the passengers on board the hijacked United 93.)

We mourned as a nation then, and we still do today, as the peaceful world many of us knew gave way to a world of war, fear, and resolve. As for the area where those 110-story buildings once stood, there will soon be a new building that is as much a tribute to those lost as it is to American resolve and perseverance: One World Trade Center.

For the past eleven years, there had been controversy regarding what should be done at that spot in Lower Manhattan. Should it be a memorial? Should new office buildings go in? Should it remain empty? The architects of that area decided to do both: build a 1,776-foot skyscraper (104 floors) on one side, and two waterfalls and a museum on the other, where the original two towers once stood. The skyscraper, now called One World Trade Center, or the “Freedom Tower''” will be fitting tribute because it represents the spirit of New York City: a place where the world does its business, and free people work to achieve a better life for themselves in a free society.

Convention-speak

Sep 5, 2012 at 11:46 AM

By Adam Fowler

In case logic gets a little lost this week during part two of the major political parties’ conventions (assuming it was ever there), it might be useful to provide a little primer for those less familiar with political rhetoric. This may help sort through the nonsense (which was always there).

First, notice the use of the word “access.” It’s one of the most used political catchphrases these days. When Party 2 says that Party 1 wants to deny Person X “access” to B, what that means in actuality is that Party 1 has no problem with Person X buying their own B, but it does not want to make a law forcing Persons Y and Z to pay for Person X’s B.

Second, if a politician says they favor “investing” in this or that government program, they really mean they want to spend more money (money the government really doesn’t have these days). When they do not favor the program, they’ll actually call it spending – but maybe add the adjective “wasteful” in front of it for the effect.

Third, watch out when Party 2 says all of our problems are the results of Party 1’s policies, or vice-versa. That is seldom ever really the case. There is plenty of blame to go around to indict both parties.