Doctor Recommended
100% Natural

The word Fascism has now no meaning except in so far as it signifies ’something not desirable.’ – George Orwell, 1946

I spent some time this weekend trying to recall any one particular article, paper or book that I had read that thoroughly convinced me not to participate in the dog and pony show known as voting. For one reason or another, Frederic Bastiat’s 19th century musings stuck out more than any:

A closer examination of the subject shows us the motive which causes the right of suffrage to be based upon the supposition of incapacity. The motive is that the elector or voter does not exercise this right for himself alone, but for everybody. The most extended elective system and the most restricted elective system are alike in this respect. They differ only in respect to what constitutes incapacity. It is not a difference of principle, but merely a difference of degree.If, as the republicans of our present-day Greek and Roman schools of thought pretend, the right of suffrage arrives with one’s birth, it would be an injustice for adults to prevent women and children from voting. Why are they prevented? Because they are presumed to be incapable. And why is incapacity a motive for exclusion? Because it is not the voter alone who suffers the consequences of his vote; because each vote touches and affects everyone in the entire community; because the people in the community have a right to demand some safeguards concerning the acts upon which their welfare and existence depend.

My life is not a public policy issue, nor do I find it the business of the American people to decide what I can do with my pinky toe, lock of hair, earwax, gluteus maximus, nose freckle or a theoretical cheek dimple. The State does not own my body, my parents do not own my body, my neighbor does not own my body and most importantly, you do not own my body.

I would find it insulting, degrading and scandalous to see my name on a ballot with a grocery list of legislation by which everyone could choose to enact.

Would it not be nauseating to see a banner on CNN with your name:

Decision Tim Swanson 2004: America Decides

Would you not be horrified to see a red, white and blue pennant perpetually floating on FOX encrusted with your name:

Election 2004: Voters Gerrymander Tim Swanson

Would the macabre site of watching a self-professed expert on you not create a loathsome reality to live in:

The Institute of Public Wonkery: Director of Tim Swanson Studies

Yet whether your 10th grade civics class illustrated democracy with this example or not, this is exactly how the political circus operates. Scads of think-tanks exist solely to propose edicts and statutes by which Person A, Group B and Business C should interact. Furthermore, there are countless councils and committees from the local to the global deciding the fate of your life under the rubric of a clichéd freedom.

Through the jingoistic actions of the political class, the word Freedom has now no meaning except in so far as it signifies “something to vote on.” To the end of Bastiatian safeguards, if one supports self-defense and self-preservation, one would be justified utilizing toothpicks, sharpened pencils, sporks and nail filers in preventing any and all persons from the canard of voting.

David Skarbek linked to a documentary entitled “Brainwashing 101” which discusses speech codes and various biases that occur on a number of different college campuses across the country. Boiling it down to some smooth broth it appeared to be yet another screed of “liberals are evil and use their position in academia to fill your head with evil brain droppings!”

I watched it and would give it a 2-out-of-5 stars for a number of different reasons. It had potential but could not deliver a consistent blow to the ivory tower windbag ideologues that it sought to expose. In fact, out of the three case studies shown in the promo, only one of them came across without resorting to hearsay, conjecture and anecdotal evidence — the Cal Poly flier bugaboo. The other two (regarding his Alma Mater and Tennessee) had some good points but left me wanting more, especially after several interviewees mentioned what they “had heard” but had no tangible proof of (that’s Lionel Hutz type of evidence).

The way I tried to view the film was through the eyes of someone who had not attended college and was for all intents and purposes a middle-of-the-road moderate who really did not follow any political movement or ideology. And I felt myself needing more Cal Poly examples to buttress any claim of a vast conspiracy by “los liberals diablos!” An “evil liberal” could have easily done the same thing if they visited a number of different private religious institutions and even various state-run facilities as well.

My own personal experiences are simply that while it is true, some professors have some sort of partisan bias towards a certain point-of-view, a discriminating student should research the topics being discussed independently, rather than simply buying the screed hook, line and sinker (you go to more than one doctor to get an opinion on an ailment or procedure, why not do the same for other types of information?).

Lastly, I found the Fellowship 9/11 parody to be quite creative and very resourceful in its attempts to lampoon Moore’s documentary — unlike MMHA, I doubt that Moore wakes up in the morning and schemes all day long as to how he can bring about the demise of the West. I could be wrong though. Just like Y2K.