The Chicken Whisperer

Socialism Sucks, in a Nutshell

My friend Rob sends along this article that really sums up pretty much everything that is wrong with the European version of socialism, which differs from its older totalitarian sibling in Russia, because it has merged with the 60's era postmodern moral equivalency to make it really something wacky.

A 25-year-old waitress who turned down a job providing "sexual services'' at a brothel in Berlin faces possible cuts to her unemployment benefit under laws introduced this year.

I mean, oh my God. Now, I'm a rather libertarian sort, so legalized prostitution isn't necessarily something I'm against. But, this is just awful.

Under Germany's welfare laws, any woman under 55 who has been out of work for more than a year can be forced to take an available job – including in the sex industry – or lose her unemployment benefit. Last month German unemployment rose for the 11th consecutive month to 4.5 million, taking the number out of work to its highest since reunification in 1990.

So, how's that euro working out for ya? Well, we'll leave aside the fact that unemployment continues to climb despite the promises of reunification with the east, despite the supposed economic windfall of the German-France mini-empire, also known as the European Union. Despite all the promises of a better life under  Schroeder's Socialists Party, unemployment continues to go up and away. But, I'm not going to talk about the economic idiocy of socialism, since in 2005 it really should be f*****g self evident.

No, what I want to talk about is the mission creep that is inherent in the 60s liberalism. So, first you have this idea of free love. After all, we are told that Europe is so much freer than the U.S. because they show boobies on TV  and 14 year-olds can put back a cold one without any problems from the authorities. So, naturally, they legalize prostitution. The modern left, though, can't just legalize something. If something is legal, then it must be OK and who are we to judge and all that. Well, if something is ok and we have declared that is not immoral, well, by God, it's a right to do what you want AND have it funded by the government. We have many examples here in the U.S. of this thought process. How many times have proposals to shut down the National Endowment of the Arts been labeled "censorship"? No, we aren't denying you your right to say stupid things or paint obscene pictures. We are merely saying that you need to fund such projects yourself. And just like the feminists desire to not only have legal abortions, but federally funded abortions here in the states, the German left said that if prostitution is legal, then it deserves equal rights at the public trough. So, you have a woman, who turns down a job as a whore, and her unemployment check is going to be withheld. There has got to be something absurdly poetic about having your ability to avoid work funded by the government. I guess if you are gonna be an entitlement whore, you might as well be a good sport and be a real whore as a favor to the economy.

Any Rand would have LOVED this story. I mean, if it's legal, it's not immoral; if it's not immoral, then it's your right, and if it's your right, then we must fund it and make sure it is treated equally under the eyes of the law, or rather the bureaucrats. Rand always said that these baby-steps in socialism would lead to, at best, a benign, yet equally evil tyranny. That when you didn't take complete control over your individuality and therefore take responsibility for it as well, then don't be surprised if the government, in funding your security, might just ask for something in return. In Germany, who knew that what they'd ask for in return would be far more than just a kiss and a thank you (but, they'll gladly pay market value!). I hesitate to use the term "sex slave", but what exactly is it when you are threatening someones ability to feed their family unless they go work for Heidi Fleiss?

(obvious caveats: yes, I know unemployment insurance that gives you a year before requiring you to actually take a job only breeds dependence and that Germany's unemployment problem has everything to do with regulation and the punishment of companies for actually hiring people. And this woman may have been waiting until the very last minute to find work. I understand all that as I noted above. Socialism's problems should be self evident to anyone with half a brain. Still, you can't help but sympathise with this poor woman.)

UPDATE: Loyal reader 40_llamas wonders if this is to outrageous to be true. Couldn't find anything on Google that blew a hole in it and the news source, The London Telegraph, is a big straight arrow newspaper in Britain. It's more respectable than your average tabloid. So, I checked Snopes and they have an article on this and they show its status as "undetermined" which means they don't know whether it is true or not. They say that they found one article in German that says the scenario is technically possible depending how one interprets the law. They seem to think Telegraph article is one that sounds worse when translated than what actually took place, but, again, there's no evidence otherwise. This supposedly happened to a real live individual. It should be easy to follow up on. More if I hear about it. The fact that it is a technical possibility still means my points above still stand.

In Case There was Any Doubt

Iraq is not Vietnam. And we're reminded of this from an old-school anti-war protester, who is a self professed admirer of Lenin (not the one from Liverpool). He's also a stalwart opponent of the Islamic Fascists who are our enemies, so he does have a lot of interesting things to say when he's not spewing socialism, albeit in a usually quite eloquent way:

But perhaps now is the moment to state the critical reasons why there is no reasonable parallel of any sort between Iraq and Vietnam.

To begin with, Vietnam had been undergoing a protracted struggle for independence since before World War II and had sustained this struggle militarily and politically against the French empire, the Japanese empire, and then after 1945 the French empire again. By 1954, at the epic battle of Dien Bien Phu, the forces of Ho Chi Minh and Gen. Giap had effectively decided matters on the battlefield, and President Eisenhower himself had conceded that Ho would have won any possible all-Vietnamese election. The distortions of the Cold War led the United States to take over where French colonialism had left off, to assist in partitioning the country, and to undertake a war that had already been lost.

There's much more where that came from. I'm not as sympathetic to his rather antiseptic view of the Vietnamese, but I do think his read on the history of the time is fairly accurate, I think. But, his point by point notation of why Iraq situation is the farthest thing from Vietnam is very important to read.

When IP Attorneys Attack

I don't know if I've mentioned my hatred for modern copyright and intellectual property law, but here's an example of how the forces of evil (software companies and the entertainment industry) continue to punish the consumer for fair use and silly people who believe just because they bought it, they have any rights over their own property. But, it's a handy guide for where evil has won and where the next battles are and where the forces of good (like the fine folks at the Electronic Freedom Foundation) have prevailed. (Via Virginia Postrel)

What He Said

Jonah Goldberg has a great piece on the elections. While its primarily about the elections effect on history, he finds time to write one of the single best lines about the vapid emptiness that is John Kerry:

John Kerry grumpily says we shouldn't "over-hype" the election, which is just one more grain of sand on the vast beach of reasons why he deserves to remain the junior senator from Ted Kennedy's state.

Now, go read the rest.

Will Iraq be OK?

Mark Steyn thinks so.

But, as it happens, it's not true. The Afghan election worked so well that, there being insufficient bad news out of it, the doom-mongers in the Western media pretended it never happened. They'll have a harder job doing that with Iraq, so instead they'll have to play up every roadside bomb and every dead poll worker. But it won't alter the basic reality: that today's election will be imperfect but more than good enough. OK, that's a bit vague by the standards of my usual psephological predictions, so how about this? Turnout in the Kurdish north and Shia south will be higher than in the last American, British or Canadian elections. Legitimate enough for ya?

I'm not sure I share the full extent of his optimism. Yesterday was inspiring to be sure. But, I'm sure their will be some nasty bumps in the road. Like, when those who have won the vote go to write a constitution. I'm partial to a rebublican form of government with a high dose of decentralized federalism. I'm also kind of big on the inalienable rights that were in the Bill of Rights. Will Iraq follow that model? Unlikely, and therein will lie the rub. But, all things considered, I do think Iraq will be far better off than it was before and the impact its liberation (see April 9th, 2003) and its subsequent revolution (yesterday's raised finger to the terrorists) will have in an impact on the middle east that will bring much instability, but as Steyn says in the article above, that's a GOOD thing.

The Moving Site of Democracy in Action

I have nothing eloquent to say about the Iraqi elections. It is a wonderful thing to behold and should remind all of us just how precious the right to vote is. The symbol of the purple ink finger is very powerful. Instapundit and Jeff Jarvis (one of the few reasonable lefties who understand the full significance of what's taking place). Go Here, Here, Here and Here. Ah hell, just go to Instapundit and scroll down. It's full of awesome stuff.

And don't let the news media spoil it for you. They can't produce accounts like this, from a Sunni in Baghdad, whose proud as hell to have voted:

The voting center that was chosen in our district is a high school in the middle of the Neighborhood . This was the same place I went in 1996 to cast my vote in a poll asking if we wanted to have Saddam as a president for life or not. I had to go at that time. The threats for anyone who refused to take that poll were no less than the death penalty. Still our district was one of the places were one could vote secretly, occasionally though. They trusted our neighborhood because it's mainly Sunni military officers who live here with their families. I and some of my friends chose "NO" but we were scared to death as we marked the paper and remained so for days.

This time we went by choice and the threat was exactly the opposite. As I was walking with many people towards the center explosion hit and gun fire were heard but most were not that close. People didn't seem to pay attention to that. Some of them even brought their little kids with them! It's like the Eid but only a thousand times better.

I entered the school and the supervisors showed me the way to were I should vote. They and the ING guys were so polite and gentle. I cast my vote and got out, not in a rush at all. This is my Eid and I felt like a king walking in his own kingdom. I saw the same look of confidence and satisfaction in the eyes of all people I met. As I left one of the guards said to me as he handed me back my cellular phone,"God bless you and your beloved ones. We don't know how to thank you. Please excuse any inconvenience on our part. We wish we didn't have to search you or limit your freedom. You are heroes" I was struck with surprise and felt ashamed. This man was risking his life all these hours in what has become the utmost target for all terrorists in Iraq and yet he's apologizing and calling us heroes. I thanked him back and told him that he and his comrads are the true heroes and that we can never be grateful enough for their services.

Lots of brave people mustering courage most of us simply can't imagine. And there are many many blogs in Iraq now, from Iraqis, from soldiers, from foreign contractors, that really give us a glimpse into the day to day of modern Iraq. Its inspiring.

The Kids are Alright

So, a majority believes private accounts should be part of Social Security reform. Its radically divided between age groups with the youngsters displaying a market savvy that would make liberal anti-capitalists' head spin. They believe SS is more risky than private accounts. Probably because they've heard enough dissertations on their company's 401K plans to understand the impact of long term growth has on stock values. Here's how Cato, the libertarian think tank that commissioned the study, sums up things.

Despite a drumbeat of criticism for weeks by congressional Democrats and a concerted public relations campaign by powerful interest groups such as the AARP against Social Security choice, 51 percent of those polled by Zogby support the introduction of individual accounts. Only 39 percent opposed individual accounts being part of any Social Security reform.

Not surprisingly, the results showed a split along age lines, with younger voters (61 percent among those under 30, 58 percent of those under 50) strongly in favor of individual accounts, while those over 65 were opposed (55 percent against). However, opposition by seniors dropped to just 45 percent if they were assured that their own benefits would not be affected.

Reflecting the sharp partisan divide nationally, opinion of individual accounts also split along political lines. Republicans were overwhelmingly united behind the reform proposal, which is a priority of President Bush's second-term agenda (74 percent supporting, 14 percent opposed). Most Democrats remain opposed with 61 percent saying they are against individual accounts. However, a surprisingly strong minority among Democrats (more than 30 percent) favor individual accounts.

Independents polled leaned toward individual accounts, 45 percent to 40 percent, with a high proportion of undecided.

What will be interesting will be how the media plays this up. My bet is you won't hear a peep on this survey, except possibly on Fox News (of course). This is great news and one hopes that the Bushies are reading this with glee. The battle over Social Security reform will make recent battles over Welfare and Health Care reform seem like childs play. The scare tactics employed by the Democrats and the AARP will be breathtaking. Believe me, I see the literature my mom gets and have to answer the questions like "is it true the Republicans want me starve?" (OK, slight, very slight exageration there).

But, buck up little campers. Generation X & Y seem to understand the simple math involved and may even be in favor of self-reliance instead of spoon-fed government dependence. This despite the best efforts of public school teachers and college professors nationwide. The kids may just be alright.

When Condi Speaks...

....Its good to give a listen.

No Thanks AARP

While I'm not a big believer that online petitions make a bit of difference in the grand scheme of things, this site is still worth visiting and signing because, well, just because. It's the principle of the thing you know. Tell the AARP to stop with the scare tactics and to the encouragement of dependency it has created among our senior citizens. The the AARP No Thanks, that when you are old enough, you hope to be joining investment clubs instead entitlement clubs.

Pollution Saves Lives

Don't tell Stephen Spielberg, but humans may be saving lives with our propensity to industrialize. This has the makings of a Hummer commercial:

The findings from a team of American climate experts suggest that were it not for greenhouse gases produced by humans, the world would be well on the way to a frozen Armageddon.

Scientists have traditionally viewed the relative stability of the Earth's climate since the end of the last ice age 10,000 years ago as being due to natural causes, but there is evidence that changes in solar radiation and greenhouse gas concentrations should have driven the Earth towards glacial conditions over the last few thousand years.

What stopped it has been the activity of humans, both ancient and modern, argue the scientists.

Funny, funny stuff and just the latest example that climatologists don't know jack squat about what is going on. I take this with same grain of salt that I take the global warming doom-and-gloomers. Still, it's a reminder that alterring our economy (and limiting individual liberty in the process) through a global one-size-fits-all solution (a la Kyoto) for a problem people are unable to clearly understand is simply nuts. (via Instapundit)