Yes, tomorrow night at the Rose and Crown in Southwark, Aiden Gregg will be giving a talk entitled Sax and Violence, hosted by Libertarian Home.
Aiden Gregg already did an earlier version of this same presentation, at my home on May 31st. The second half of his talk that night was him reading out this essay, which concerns a country called Equistan. Attenders tomorrow night are asked to acquaint themselves with this interesting and thoughtful text.
Equistan is afflicted by extreme sexual inequality between different men, caused by there being many more men in Equistan than women. Luckily for Equistan, however, it has a government which addresses this issue by imposing sexual justice, of a sort that redistributes some of the sexual favours bestowed by women upon appealing men to less appealing men. Most Equistanians understand that these arrangements are both fair and necessary. A few sexual libertarians (such as the so-called “Liberty Belles”) grumble about them, but such malcontents are an extremist fringe, whose arguments are briefly described and refuted.
The talk at my place was not recorded, but this one at the Rose and Crown, assuming nothing goes wrong, will be. Highly recommended.
LATER: Libertarian Home has more.
See this here? This here’s my ten-foot pole – the ten-foot pole with which I will not be touching this one.
In fact, over here is my spare ten-foot pole, and I’m going to be tapng that one to my primary ten-foot pole, so that I have a twenty-foot pole, with which I will not be touching this one.
It is pretty funny, tho ;-).
llater,
llamas
Gosh when can I move to Equistan? So long as i’m only linked to the good-lookers, I’ll move there!
In case anyone thinks this is an artificial example….
The religious-political movement that tore apart the Persian Empire (leaving it open to Islamic conquest) was not just about the “fair distribution” of goods, it was also about common access to WOMEN.
Egalitarian elements of the Anababtist movement were in favour of much the same thing.
Members of the B-H gang in Munster in the 1960s-1970s passed the cage in which the bones of members of the previous egalitarian revolt had been stored in, centuries before.
The idea sometimes is that the lure of sex, to get people (especially sexually frustrated men) to support collectivism, was invented in the 1960s.
Actually the idea (the tactic) is ancient.
The 1960s did not invent it – although it was a Frankfurt School dream. And nor did the Free Love Fabians and Bloomsbury set of the 1900s and 1890s.
It actually goes back as far as one cares to look (various Classical Greek philosophers played with these ideas).
Equistan could solve it’s problem by waging war on a neighbour. The men could join the army, and they would either be killed (reducing the numbers), or they would be on the winning side and could grab some females from the loser (increasing the female numbers). I have no idea why these time-honoured methods are not being used, but i suspect the women love having multiple partners legally- they’re not sluts, they are public servants!
Again – this is seriously suggested.
Islamic commentators (some of them women) have suggested a return to plundering attacks on the West, and some of the plunder (again this is clearly stated) would be women.
If there is no natural good and evil (if what is “good” is either simply the commands of the Holy Book OR what is expedient) then no moral opposition can be made to this (I will leave aside the idea that humans are not beings and the actions of humans are all predetermined – because this idea is batshit insane), this leaves practical criticism.
How practical would such a policy be?
Perhaps less wildly impractical than might be supposed.
Look at the declining fertility rates of Europe (not down to about half replacement level in many European countries – the “social reforms” of the 1960s and so on turning out to be slow motion genocide), also the creeping bankruptcy of the Western nations (due to the Welfare States and the credit bubble financial systems) and the collapse of European military forces (not about 1% of GDP – and still falling).
But there is also a character factor – people are being taught to be nonviolent and submissive (yes people can overcome their education and media propaganda – but it takes effort and there may not be time to relearn all the skills, and mental attitudes, that the establishment elite have worked so hard to undermine).
Some small examples….
There have recently been several massive jewel robberies on the French Rivera – what resistance was there?
None – guards (as well as officials of the company) are taught NOT to resist.
One of the leading gangs (the Pink Panther Gang) even broke one of their members out of prison in Switzerland – there was (I am told) no real resistance.
Indeed one of the prison guards has even been given “counciling” – as he suffered …. (whatever the pretend medical term is) from the sight of the AK47s been waved in his face (the idea that you have sworn an oath to not let the prisoners escape while you live? do not be silly, that is “old fashioned”).
This is not a Muslim gang.
However, it is hard to believe that the fighting men (and they are fighting men) of North Africa are not noting all of this with interest.
Recently Mark Steyn was in Monaco – and he thought to himself “this is a nice place – but why should not people just sail across the Med and TAKE it?”
Why not indeed.
And the United States?
A culture based on “Big Bird” from “Sesame Street” is unlikely to impress such people as the Mexican gangs (who collect the skulls of their enemies).
The idea education system (and children’s T.V. propaganda) is designed to lead people to hate the past of America (evil – “racist”, “imperialist” and so on) and peaceful (indeed submissive).
Certainly (again) people can overcome their education (and media propaganda) but it takes effort and time – and their may not be time to relearn the old attitudes (habits of behaviour) and practical skills (such as shooting).
After all a child who even makes a paper gun or goes “bang-bang” with their fingers is likely to be expelled (if not subjected to “medical treatment”) in a modern “nice school”.
Centuries of disbarment and people being treated as having to be peaceful have had an effect before.
Small numbers of Germanic barbarians were able to take over the Western Roman Empire.
And small numbers of Islamic warriors were (later) able to make the (vast) Christian populations of the Middle East and North Africa their subjects.
How?
Because these people were really slaves BEFORE the conquests.
This is being done again.
“You are not responsible for your actions” (so one feel no shame for failure – failure to resist, or anything).
“Your history is evil” (in contradiction with the above, as how were one’s forefathers responsible for their actions if people are not responsible for their actions?).
“Everyone should get X, Y, Z as RIGHTS – the only rights that do not exist are private property rights….”
Such doctrines are taught (in cloaked language) to children and adults (by the Frankfurt School and the P.C. movement – amongst others) in the hope of getting them to gradually submit to socialism.
However, they may lead to submission to rather different forces.
Should anyone doubt the above…..
How much support (among the leading members of society) would there be for what is the First and Second Amendments of the American Bill of Rights (based on the old British Bill of Rights – which is now forgotten).
Right to keep and bear arms? Do not be a BEAST.
Freedom of speech? Well not “Hate Speech” – obviously…..
So one really not go on – so I will not.
Paul. It would be helpful if you linked to evidence of such things as this:
Here you go, Simon.
Not long ago, Reagan openly mocked the Soviets. If those days went, surely they might return.
Alisa, thanks for the link–I think đ . Revolting. This, by the way, is why Pamela Geller calls such people “savages.”
Very funny, Mr. Ed. The laughs are most welcome.
It is not so shocking Simon.
After all Islam has often been called a Grand Revolt against the Talmud.
What the Talmud actually is (warning you are getting this from an Anglican who can not read a word of Hebrew) is an effort to interpret the Torah (what we call the early books of the Bible) in the light of reason and morality, a conversation (over centuries) between various learned and wise men (they were all men – although that may be changing in modern times). Without that, the Law (the law of the early books of the Bible) is indeed “savage”.
Even in what Christians call the 6th century Jews were in the habit of, when reading the Torah aloud and before the uneducated, placing their hand over parts of the Torah that are savage (for example where the text calls for the the death penalty for adultery and so on) in case they made the mistake of reading it aloud (to people unlearned in how the Talmud interprets such things away).
The great Islamic cry was “raise your hand” – if the text calls for X then X must be done.
What is a Holy Book must be the literal moral truth – there is no room for human reason, or the measuring stick of natural law. No use for the Talmudic scholars of the Jews, or the Scholastics of the Christians.
There was latter a faction of Muslims who tried to import such notions into Islam – but they were defeated a thousand years ago.
We Christians should not feel too superior.
Saint Augustine of Hippo is not exactly someone to be proud of (justifying persecution and pushing predestination). Yet both Catholics and, most, Protestants are taught to revere Augustine.
How much is there to choose between (for example) the theology of John Calvin and Islam?
One can not just say that “whatever the text says is good is good” (the position that holds that the ALLENGED “will” of God is, BY DEFINTION, good).
Otherwise one ends up applauding the acts of Joseph in Egypt (remember the people could have stored their own food – it was taxed away from them, and then only returned in return for both their livestock and then their land – everything went to the Ruler), and Joshua in the Holy Land (murdering women and children).
Remember “the Devil can quote scripture” – indeed Satan is more learned in scripture than any human.
Whether one is a believer or an atheist – morality can not be subcontracted. War
Believers believe that God created reason (and the moral sense) for those occasions when one faces the darkness.
And that can be at any time – including when one is reading scripture.
A Randian Objectivist might reply at this point.
“Then what is the point of religion?”.
To which the reply would be “it is about a being a crutch – or a reward”.
Perhaps we are indeed all alone in the Dark.
I do not believe so – but I could be mistaken.
Of course, if I am wrong, I will never find out that I am wrong.
Still a discussion for another time.
Of course, in Jewish theology, atheists can go to Heaven.
Certainly they go by the Grace of God – but without even believing in the existence of God.
That might lead to some interesting encounters.
Wholly OT but did the Nazis lose WW2, or just wait?
And if my link had stuck, it might have been this, sorry.
They lost Ed.
And the Marxists will go the way of their bastard child National Socialist.
But it will not be because thee or me help a few “libertarian” leftists get up-close-and-personal under the wheels of a truck or a train.
It will be because their doctrines contradict the laws of the universe.
For the economic laws are as firm as the physical laws.
One can disregard either – but not without consequences.
The terrible thing is that they drag the innocent to destruction with them.
That is their real crime.
As I have said, anyone who has voted Labour in a General Election in the UK does not deserve not to, starve, or to die horribly in an NHS hospital. Actions have consequences and one should presume that they intended the natural consequences of their actions for themselves and others. Millions are to blame for the state of the world.
Space, time and disinclination prevent me from Randianly listing all those who might get their just desserts, it would be a pity if they did, but one should not pity them for their stupidly or venality.
Sounds suspiciously like Marxist economic determinism to me ;).
Rosenquist. Not really, it is simply stating what will happen in general terms, just as stating that with price caps set below the market rate you end up with get shortages.
If Marxists (or anyone else) implements a Marxist programme, nationalisation, expropriation, killing etc. then civilisation ends and death and famine will stalk the land, as sure as if you put a lit match to petrol at room temperature in air, it will burn.