A “hot take” on Catalonia and the recent crackdown by the Spanish central government.
The central government in Spain decided to use force to disrupt the independence referendum held by the Catalan regional government. Exact figures on the vote are not available – partially due to Spanish police seizing ballot boxes, and the lack of independent verification or accounting of the votes. However, the regional prime minister claims victory for the “yes” vote.
The stance of the EU, normally ready to moralize at the drop of a hat, was muted at best. At worst, it was quite unhelpful. Worrying about the EU’s integrity came first. Unsurprisingly, France backed Spain. The US said something similar (NOTE: this was a bit ago, but current events have absorbed all attention here).
The most interesting reactions, I figured, would be from Italy. Two of their regions are going after greater autonomy this month. There appears to be a bit of a split of opinion amongst the figures moving for autonomy in Italy…while the central government was quite silent.
No official statement was made on the referendum by Italian Prime Minister Paolo Gentiloni, who told journalists the week before the vote that he considered it “a question for Spain”, or Foreign Minister Angelino Alfano.
So we see little to no support from governments, or the extragovernmental bureaubehemoth EU. This leads me to some questions of you, the resident libertarians (or close enough to it).
- Should the Catalans (or Kurds or Lombards) be able to vote themselves out of the country?
- If their vote is not recognized, disrupted or such – what do they do next? Civil disobedience? Guerrilla warfare? Full on revolt? Grin and bear it?
- What would you do if you were a Catalan, Kurd or Lombard who wanted out?
NOTE: As an Illinoisan…I often fear the opposite. I dread the day the the rest of the Union wakes up and says “OUT!”.
You could team up with California and New York.
*blinks away burning tears of shame*
0th comment?
Yeah…if you comment before posting, it does this. Sort of a Zeroth Law of Posting.
I’ve commented after posting as the author and it gets 0th commented.
I think it’s if the contrubter comments first it doesn’t get counted for numbering.
We Illinoisians’ believe locking up our Governors has staved off the Union.
Voting is bad, mkay?
That’s pretty ballsy for a euro.
I would hand that guy a US passport in a heartbeat.
I wonder if he’s any relation to Fulgencio?
Everywhere could be great without the people who inhabit it, if you ask me.
Florida is great except for the Brochettawards.
It’s time we reinstitute an old custom….
“Hold mine mead and cast thine eyes upon this!”
You forgot the honorific “M’Lady”
Damme!
This isn’t about my hunting Mexicans remark, is it?
To be sure, this is a reference to Braveheart.
Prima nocta?
Has just been revoked!
Italy’s problem is the Italians,
FINALLY, SOMEONE STICKS IT TO THOSE WOP-GUINEA FUCKS.
*eagerly awaits Rufus*
Democracy is the best, as long as it gives the results that the ruling class wants.
“Smells like mutton, tastes like mutton. Hey! Where did the sheep go anyway?”
We’re I Catalonian I would be pretty furious. As I understand it, they are the most productive part of spain and want to not be leeched white by the National government. It’s also historically interesting to note that Catalonia region was a hotbed of demsoc amcom and unionist activity during the civil war, the region has always been restive..
That is why I was looking at Italy – Lombardy is easily the richest part of the country – if they (and Veneto) scooted out, Italy would be much the less.
I think, and fear that this may be a catalyst for the EU military. I mean I don’t know that much about the state of the Spanish military but I’m guessing that if they couldn’t handle the ETA all that well, then a much more unified and wealthy province could probably grind them down.
Also how much blood is Spain ready to shed vs Brussels.
ETA lost. And that was really handled by the cops and getting the French to squeeze on their side of the border.
Would Germans be signing up to join an army to go squash Spain (again)?
Damn it…I blew a “you know who else” joke there, didn’t I?!
You might have.
I mean the Kondor Legion did have a pretty good record last time round.
I’m not as worried about an EU military force being established as I am NATO being asked to quell a civil war by one or more member states.
Kulaks and wreckers, huh?
Simply put – yes. If the goal of libertarianism is to promote voluntary arrangements, I don’t see a counter argument. Same thing with any state that actually had the balls to try it here, no matter how derpy.
Was just about to quote it myself.
That document doesn’t count for anything. {so I’ve been told}
It’s, like totally, 100 years old and was written by white cis-hetero slave owning shitlords.
Wow, that document sounds dusty.
I think that it’s a basic principle of liberty, that the people in a given area should be able to separate from the the central authority, breaking off and forming their own cohesive unit. It’s likened in my mind to the laboratories of democracy but on an international scale.
The harder question is from Playa below…what of those that want to remain Spanish? 50% plus one person ends that?
I think counter secession would be a good balance, but then again that seems to be a detailed that should be ironed out ahead of time.
Like if x area wished to remain then what? Let them remain and repatriate anyone in those areas back to loyal catalonia.
You might end up with a US Congressional district map!
Like Croatia?
Does Spain have a local equivalent of counties/parishes? If you tally the vote at that level, you could probably get to a “close enough” status, and then repatriation for those that were on the “wrong” side of the line would be cleaner, I think.
If people want to break free, they can do it peacefully or they can do it violently.
There isn’t much proof that the colonies had a majority opinion of the residents wanting to break free from the king. So in my opinion, I’d say 50% + 1 is an overwhelming amount in favor of independence because people often either don’t have an opinion or don’t have a very strong one. I think it’s probably rare that any revolution really takes place with majority support.
That harder question has an easy answer.
Why should states be based on geography?
If we wanted to form glibertopia, we should all be able to secede and do so.
Because, back in the day, it made them easier to defend. Moreover, people didn’t traverse terrain features like mountain ranges and rivers to the extent they do today. With travel lessened, different cultures were easier to establish and keep more homogeneous.
Now? Probably for many of the same reasons.
Why do the Catalans (or the Walloons, or Lombards, or any other ethnic sore in Europe you want to pick) want to leave? Is it possible to appease their concerns? If they leave, will they be able to take care of themselves, or will they merely be absorbed by their neighbors?
Why should states be based on geography?
Because the alternative is a society where you don’t know what legal obligations or duties anybody has, or how disputes with them can be resolved. Territorial jurisdiction means everyone you run into is under the same legal regime. I don’t think there is a practical alternative.
QRCodes on everything?
People just need to wear symbols on their sleeves.
I was gonna say to color code everything, but … well … you get the idea…..
Polycentric law would handle some of that, in theory. There are precedents in history: the feudal European system of church/manoral/royal law, the Romans allowed subject peoples to run their legal systems for that applied to non-Romans, and for that matter our own system of federal vs. state laws is something like polycentrism. Not sayin’ it’s easy or anything, I’m just saying there are possible alternatives.
Is that even true now?
Of course, it would still be true, if you think of it as still being territorial, but varying with the owner of the territory. So anyone you run into would be under the same regime. It would just be patchwork.
In re: question 1
My gut answer is: absolutely. But it’s far more complicated than that. If they get a 100% vote, then the answer is still absolutely.
What if it’s a close vote, though? Should the majority be able to strip the minority of their Spanish citizenship?
Then you get counter secession, like W.V. and Virginy.
I think that’s something for the people of Catalonia to work out first and foremost. Not the state. But it’s a theoretical question as the vote wasn’t even allowed. Obviously.
Would Spain take in any that left? Like Tories moving to Canada after the Revolution?
Hmm, yes, ‘moved’. We’re just going to side-step that whole ‘confiscation of their property’ thing several of your states did right?
YOU LOST, GET OVER IT!
But, I was more referring to the people who don’t want to stay – does Spain welcome them, or turn them away? The UK took everyone who left, right? Would Spain?
We hold these truths to be sacred & undeniable; that all men are created equal & independent, that from that equal creation they derive rights inherent & inalienable, among which are the preservation of life, & liberty, & the pursuit of happiness…FUCK YOU YOU LIKE THE KING? GIMME YOUR LAND AND WE’LL SELL IT TO OUR CRONIES.
Different scenario with the UK, considering they were effectively trying to out-breed the Frenchies and turn Quebec into a more English province initially. Inside most of them just ended up settling in more English areas and separating into new colonies.
But despite the motive, they let them come on over. I think Spain would…maybe, do the same? Or would they look at what you were first…”doctor? let ’em in! dole bludger…stay out, you!”
Yes, but the point of the motive was it was a strategic consideration to maintain a British North America power base. Spain, outside of external pressure and a desire for educated elites, as you mention, has a lot less reasons to do so. The finances of relocation might be just too much for them to bother.
I don’t think they’re going to allow an independent Catalonia anyway, they’ll just try to stomp them and, if they are even close to independence, the EU is going to recognize what a precedence that sets and assist in ending it.
The EU wouldn’t let it go that far, they’d help Spain to economically kerb-stomp Catalonia. They can’t afford even an an attempt in the original Common Market for schism to occur. It’d be like the domino scene in V for Vendetta.
The Brits, they can comfort themselves and say deGaulle was right, trying to keep les RosBifs out, but Spain and Italy are a different matter.
“…that from that equal creation they derive rights inherent & inalienable, among which are the preservation of life, & liberty, & the pursuit of happiness…”
It is very telling to me that it does not read ‘life, liberty and property’. Happiness? What the fuck is happiness? It’s a goddamned platitude, thats what. We did experiment with liberty more so than any people in history and we have been wildly successful, I give credit for that but the founders just didn’t have the stones to go all the way. If I live to be 500 years old I will still be pissed about that.
And the only reason I’m even thinking about this, BTW, is because of CalExit.
You don’t like the US? Fine, leave. But I’m going to stay, thanks.
As a non-Californian, your freedom is just the sacrifice you are going to have to make to get California out of the Union for the rest of us.
You don’t get a say on taxation, why do you think you get a say on independence.
It’s such a small portion of CA, geographically, that’d go, too. The coasts from, say Ft. Ross south to San Diego, and inland maybe to the tops of the Coast Range? You hit 5, and you’ve gone too far East. Because the Valley is a long way from lefty enough to want to leave the US, no matter how many Latin farmworkers the state imports.
I don’t have the time to do this, but someone should take a close look at how Crimea is doing since they “chose” to join Russia. I’m sure there were a good number of people who wanted that change and voted for it, but what happened to the people who didn’t? See also, American loyalists after the Revolutionary War ended.
Select orbital bombardment tends restore compliance in short order…oh wait that question was for the other guys wasn’t it.
Well, if you were able to arrange that a few blocks of Madrid vanished in a meteor strike…I suspect more than one Catalan would be willing to talk.
I’ve always wondered why our reptilian overlords allow so much anti-alien/monster invader propaganda to be made. It would seem to threaten their rule. I mean, do you really us humanoids believing all those tales of the plucky, doughy, warm-blooded mammals triumphing?
Admit it, you fucked up when you decided to appoint David Icke as your ambassador, didn’t you?
“Everyone is a (((lizard)))” *wink* *wink*
– David Icke
1) Yes
2) Start with civil disobedience and escalate up to full on revolution if necessary
3) Lay low, try to avoid the fighting, protect my family while supporting the revolutionaries where I could.
This question I think also sits in the back of many libertarian conversation about theoretical and real encroachments on our liberty, how far should a movement go to secure it’s goals? The IRA accomplished only some goals during the troubles and never the end goal, They are probably among the more successful groups I can name that use violence (or at least the PIRA). Where does the line between self-defense end and aggression begin, when does the movement decide that the central gov is not listening time to up the pressure?
I’m staying WAY out of this one ….
— Prof Bernado de la Paz
When in doubt you have the classics to guide you
The Old Man had a fair amount of wisdom, didn’t he?
Totes unwoke, cis-white shitlord.
The Stern Gang, Irgun and Haganah would like a word. So too, the Viet Minh and Cong. (Though they needed the NVA to show up in Battle of Kursk sized numbers in the end.)
The Israelis/Zionists would have lost bigly, were it not for a tidal wave of migration. Ditto the Texicans.
As long as there are civil means of obtaining goals, even though they be difficult and require much patience, violence is off of the table. That is the whole point of civil society – to avoid violence. Violence destroys economies and cultures. It destroys people. Unless there is no other means and the stakes are very very high, violence is counter-productive. Who wants to be the king of ashes?
Who wants to be the king of ashes?
The Marlboro Man?
*applause*
The Australian Cricket Team?
*prolonged ovation*
“If their vote is not recognized, disrupted or such – what do they do next? Civil disobedience? Guerrilla warfare? Full on revolt? Grin and bear it?”
Bombard Fort Sumter.
Pfft…been done.
They’ll get it right this time.
Thanks, Swiss for the great piece about an important topic. I’ve been following via articles in The Guardian – their coverage is relatively comprehensive and somewhat sympathetic to Catalonia.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/oct/02/ripples-from-catalan-referendum-could-extend-beyond-spain
I’m sympathetic to their food. It should be able to do what it wants.
“The Tapas Diaspora?”
I’ll accept any refugees, as long as they’re acorn fed pigs.
AMEN!
Acorns not Filberts!
Isn’t this all Spanish food?
Isn’t Catalonian food more focused on, say balacau?
1.Should the Catalans (or Kurds or Lombards) be able to vote themselves out of the country?
I’m inclined to say yes, with some reservations. To the extent that the regional government respected my rights as much or more than the central government, of course. On the other hand, I might be a little disinclined as a New Yorker to support the Empire State breaking away from the Union. But, within the context of rights, why isn’t a government imposing itself on people against their will sort of the definition of a tyranny? Sure, the rest of the country benefits from their being part of the larger whole. But, if the Catalans (or Kurds or Lombards) don’t see an equal benefit from the arrangement in return, what you’re describing is fundamentally a coercive and exploitive relationship.
Can’t they just vote out the socialists to solve this problem? Or is it too late for that, too many takers?
Many of these go beyond just getting tapped by socialist mosquitoes. Language, history, culture and the like (especially in Kurdistan) play a part too.
Can’t they just vote out the socialists to solve this problem?
How are they going to do that when the rest of the country (and presumably a majority) look on them as a cash cow?
But, as Swiss Servator observes, a lot of this goes to things beyond just the economics.
Federalism as originally envisioned was such an inspired brilliant idea. Let the states and people in them do damn near all the governing. N direct federal taxes on the people, extremely few federal powers that affect normal people. Too bad we couldn’t keep it.
If you can stand to watch him, Molyneux had a pretty good vid on the Catalonian situation and how the productive areas of Spain are being milked by the unproductive areas.
https://youtu.be/FRU-CL9HNW8
Two relevant links in a row!
*dies happy*
Northern Italians have a similar gripe:
Lega Nord per l’Indipendenza della Padania
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lega_Nord
You can breathe a sigh of relief – state and federal officials say there is little health risk caused by school flutes tainted with semen. Another win for old men with candy.
LA Times is sciencing the fuck out of this story.
I have a similar policy when it comes to hotel couches.
You immediately smear your semen on them?
I’m not sure “immediately” is the right word here.
Within 3 minutes?
1. Yes — though I would strike the “the” from “the Catalans”.
2. The vote is irrelevant once the popular will has moved; unless/until it does, no permanent change is possible. Influence is the only way.
3. Keep my head down. Minimize the intrusion of power on my own personal life.
I’ll be in Barcelona in a couple of weeks; I’ll try to report back on the opinion of my friends, and any general sentiment I might notice.
Our Man in Catalonia
Very Nice.
Send to our submissions box, thankee!
I think I’m going to end up winning the bet I made with a friend in university that there will be more countries twenty years from now, rather than less.
Seven billion countries, give or take.
When was it made and when is the end point?
How many countries at the start? How did you determine it?
2006, can’t recall the exact number but I’m winning cause Montenegro and Kosovo, UN recognized.
And PALESTINE!
And more continents.
Zealandia is going to be a thing by the time my kids are in high school.
Wonderful, a new continent, home to Great Cthulhu.
I’ve been having some strange dreams recently, come to think of it.
I knew those shifty Kiwis were up to something!
1. Yes
2. Probably do the Guerilla Warfare thing like the Basque did for a while. I wonder how those guys are handling not being invited to the separatist cocktail parties?
3. Catalan? Keep on, keepin on. Lombard? Find a US consulate and apply for citizenship. Kurd? Arm up.
3. What would you do if you were a Catalan, Kurd or Lombard who wanted out?
I’d look for a party committed to making the central government completely, utterly, and totally dysfunctional until such time as they granted us independence.
You mean, import the US House of Representatives?
Genius!
Illinois Legislature.
What do you mean? It works just fine.
/Madigan counting his money.
The matter of internal minorities in a separatist society leads to some tricky ends. I know that there’s been talk about how if Quebec ever separates there’s a large group of Montreal that would want to also have a referendum on whether they could re-join Canada. So what’s the solution there? You let the separatists refuse to recognize further referendums, or we end up like Baarle Nassau?
The Border Patrol Union says “Yes, please!”.
I think a breakaway society that refuses to recognize the right of internal minorities to break away and rejoin the original society forfeits its claim to legitimacy. You can’t well say the central government lacks the legitimate authority to impose its will on you while doing precisely that.
In the case of Quebec the French have a contextual historical claim of ‘owning’ the city however. It was founded and developed by them.
Also in the case of Quebec you have the Mohawk, who hate the French far more than they hate the English, so they’re probably not sticking around either.
In the case of Quebec the French have a contextual historical claim of ‘owning’ the city however. It was founded and developed by them.
But, that seems a bit of a cop-out, isn’t it? The Quebecois only developed Montreal in the context of being part of Canada. So, the same logic would imply that Ottawa has every right to tell Quebec to go pound sand with regard to independence.
Sovereignty over the people of Montreal would rightly belong to the people of Montreal, regardless of whose great uncle’s third cousin’s best friend’s aunt’s sister-in-law made the development of the city possible.
The Quebecois only developed Montreal in the context of being part of Canada.
City was around for over two hundred years before Canada as a modern geopolitical entity was even a thing, and a hundred before the Conquest which established Quebec as a British colony.
Sovereignty over the people of Montreal would rightly belong to the people of Montreal
Which would be whom? There’s English districts and French districts, not to mention whole mess of other groups (which often shift over decades, the old Jewish area of St. Urbain Street is now mostly Caribbeans, for example). If Montreal declares independence, are individual French neighbourhoods allowed to declare independence from it and join the separatists? The end result is the same Baarle-Nassau problem.
This is why the loose confederation of the Holy Roman Empire was ideal. It provided localism and restricted the strong arm of the state.
…and the most destructive war in European history until the 20th century.
“and the most destructive war in European history”
….instigated by its expansionist and centralized government oriented neighbors
Worked well against Napoleon too. “Hey, our system fails apart if we aren’t completely isolationist” is not a selling point.
So, we must have a large centralized state, because other states may be large and centralized. Libertarian moment?
Maybe we shouldn’t view feudalistic empires as a valid means of political development if they fall apart on contact with still feudalistic but more centralized models?
So, you support centralized states and dislike the concept of consent by the ruled?
Actually I’m pointing out that your ‘ideal’ was in fact nothing of the sort. One can argue the merits of the Swiss canton or Dutch state system, but the HRE was fundamentally and consistently unstable for most of its ‘localized’ period, both in foreign policy and its local rebellions. It was not a model to emulate, unless you like the idea of Anabaptists fucking your wife.
If you’re going to dishonestly put words in my mouth, we’re done here.
Gentlemen, please?
Ok. I meant no offense. I was trying to understand your point
Of course I was being flippant with my rebuttals, but that’s par for the course. I owe you a Molson, how about that?
JT….think back, a while ago…Eddie…remember?
Here *sticks sword into ground* and no further!
< In a Monty Python “Mrs. Niggerbaiter” accent >
Sure you can. Government is nothing if not hypocritical. It’s only a philosophical discussion in the meeting rooms – out in the real world the economics is what matters.
True, so far as the point goes. But, if you want to play realpolitik to its logical conclusion, it’s not economics that matters, but military capabilities. And breakaway governments are, by and large, reliant on the moral high ground to overcome their deficit in that regard. If the world sees you as nothing but a bunch of hypocrites, not too many people are going to raise eyebrows to your previous central authority crushing your bid to break away.
I’m looking at Afghanistan and I’m not seeing military capability mattering all that much. I suppose you could argue the outside militaries lack the will to use their capabilities, but I think the lack of will comes from the fact that there is little to gain.
Crimea going back to Russia seemed more an economic decision than a test of military capabilities.
Maybe these are only exceptions, but they are the most recent ones that came to mind.
We’ll have to see how Venezuela plays out, but it seems like economics is eventually going to do in their military/police.
There were two independence referendums that recently occurred: one in Iraq and one in Spain. In Iraq the central government just ignored the results (to be fair they probably couldn’t do anything else even if they wanted to), whereas in Spain the central government sent in military police to beat civilians who were going to vote. Spain unleashed barbarism on its own population and the EU looked the other way. So much for the enlightened West.
They could lose their most valuable tax-serfs! EU leaders don’t care if Muslim “refugees” destroy their civilization, but put their revenue in jeopardy and they would gladly start shooting troublemakers.
The most interesting reactions, I figured, would be from Italy.
Veneto already did this in 2014 and it won 90-10.
No one gave a shit then. Why would they this time?
To clarify, independence won 90-10.
Incidentally, we were on vacation in southern Austria this year, and it was full of vacationing families from the Veneto. Of course they were part of Austria for longer than they’ve been part of Italy, so they identify with the region. And yet not only did they speak Italian, they seemed unwilling to speak a word of anything else. It was a weird scene.
California out!
Article 1, section 2 of the Pennsylvania constitution sums up my views rather well.
This should be fun:
What purpose does government serve at all?
GO!
“An institution which prevents injustice other than such as it commits itself.”
-Ibn Khaldun
to solidify an illusion of external order
Hitman on retainer.
Same as a tape-worm, tick, or plague bacteria – too feed on a host until the host dies or figures out how to dislodge it.
Violence
To provide for the common defense.
To make and enforce generally accepted rules enabling people to live in proximity to each other in mostly relative harmony.
To organize the commons.
Build infrastructure in a way to avoid free rider problems
Pretty much the same since the Code of Hammurabi. If this is all government did I’d probably wouldn’t be a libertarian.
We all know that mission creep is SOP for government.
I have always thought this was a convenient point for libertarians: if the government were minimal enough almost no one would give a crap whether it was technically minarchist or an-cap. That’s why we all get along so well right?
When it got that small, I’m sure we’d find something awful to squabble over, like deep pan pizza or AC/DC.
And that’s when it would get bloody.
Infighting is what libertarians do the best!
I disagree. Regional culture war, that’s what we do best.
Splitter!
I prefer to re-fight the War of Northern Aggression.
Because the stakes are so small.
uhhhh, *low*
https://youtu.be/tsHlKYElKX0
Them’s fightin’ words!
/raises dukes
*drops gloves*
The smaller the differences the bigger the arguments. (New Iron law? or am I being presumptuous)
Swift had a point about Lilliput and Blefuscu fighting over how to break open their eggs.
Certainly from an outsider’s viewpoint, nothing seems as relentless and risible as fundamentally identical ideologies falling out over the trivial –
see: 1930’s German Communists and fascists
14th century Vatican vs Avignon
Bolsheviks vs Menshaviks
– until they became non-trivial
“To make and enforce generally accepted rules enabling people to live in proximity to each other in mostly relative harmony.”
This is where shit goes sideways. It’s way too vague and “generally accepted” opens the door for tyranny of the majority.
Not really going to disagree. Even in a common law/arbiter based system I imagine you can get some pretty screwy laws.
To take my money and limit my freedom.
Roads and a courts
MUH ROADZ!
form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity?
What a surprise, Ryan knuckles under.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/10/03/paul-ryan-sides-with-hillary-shelves-bill-to-deregulate-suppressors/
Welp, time to start looking for a primary challenger to make a modest donation to.
I ordered my suppressor this morning. I was waiting on share, but figured it was dead after LV.
Phrasing!
It was inevitable since it would be much harder to get the necessary Dem votes in the Senate. Just wait a few months, maybe a year.
Should the Catalans (or Kurds or Lombards) be able to vote themselves out of the country?
Yup. I’d probably want to see a supermajority of some kind, repeated over two consecutive elections, but in principle, why the hell not?
If their vote is not recognized, disrupted or such – what do they do next? Civil disobedience? Guerrilla warfare? Full on revolt? Grin and bear it?
Depends on how bad the central government really is. Spain/Italy bad? – civil disobedience. Turkey/Iraq/Iran bad? – maybe more shooty.
Spain/Italy bad? – civil disobedience
I feel like there’s a categorical difference between Spain and Italy here. The Venetian independence vote got ignored by the Italian government, but the police weren’t sent in to crack some skulls. Spain, on the other hand, …
I was shocked. When in history has Spain ever been heavy handed?
No one expects the The Inquisition.
The Venetian independence vote was probably ignored because it was a joke.
The vote in Catalonia was organized by the actual government of the region.
Celebrity derp.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-hollywood/2017/10/03/celebrities-ramp-attacks-gun-owners-following-vegas-shooting-gun-control-now/
http://cdn.someecards.com/someecards/usercards/behold-the-field-in-which-i-grow-my-fucks-lay-thine-eyes-upon-it-and-thou-shalt-see-that-it-is-barren-4bc2e.png
I like URL’s with nothing to hide.
I don’t know who half of those people are.
The only one that disappoints me is Ron Pearlman. I thought he was cool.
That’s the point – they’re all trying to be cool.
What they aren’t trying to do is demonstrate honesty and practicality, but that’s not what people reward actors for, is it?
When was the last time a box office filled because a movie reviewer said “See this movie because actor such-and-such is a really smart person”?
It’s like getting pissed because your poodle can’t solve quadratic equations.
I almost didn’t read the link because I like movies. I dislike hearing the monkeys I pay to dance, opinions.
It’s the same with music. Jerry Joseph is one of my all time favorite song writers. I get a little joy knowing that he hates that people like me buy his music (which is really really good, even his blatant “protest” stuff)?
Jennifer Lawrence’s new movie? Oh, you said “filled.”
The election ads that Hollywood pumped out were the worst because they were so transparently manipulative and based on blatantly obvious psychological tactics. Because that is what they are good at, psychological manipulation of an audience.
You never see a celebrity avoid these tactics and instead just have an open, one-on-one debate with someone from across the aisle because they’re absolutely garbage at it. They end up like Ben Affleck and they get butchered in a discussion with Sam Harris or even someone even as low-brow as Bill Maher.
Well duh it would obviously be this one…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stuart_Saves_His_Family
Ouch. 6 mil budget; less than mil box.
Once you are a proven money-loser in Hollywood there’s only one place left to go.
They’re a bunch of rich people who pay armed security guards to follow them around.
It may be correct that politics is show business for ugly people, but it is now conclusively proven that show business is politics for stupid people.
Perfect. Not a single one of those people is influential. Except for Margaret Cho. She influences me to do the opposite of what she’s doing.
Come to think of it, a few of them have that effect on me.
Actors are effectively ordinary people who happen to be very good at lying professionally and benefited financially from it. Their politics are just as stupid as the layman’s, and should be treated in equal respect.
It’s the one thing about Plato’s philosophy I agree with, along with making them unfit for public service. Sadly, he thought Top Men *were* fit for public service, so he’s batting 0.5.
Geez. Pick one strategy, ONE STRATEGY, and stick with it.
This is why they keep losing.
Some of my lefty friends are saying things like “We all need to work together. Nobody wants to take your guns.” Ummm, do you know what your fellow travelers are saying? Because I do.
This is the ol’ “feminism is about equal rights for everyone!” horseshit as well. Alright then, if you actually believe that maybe you need to clean house in your own ideology of all the ones screeching anti-male or anti-white insanity. Or you could be lying. Hmmm…
Kimmel was saying “it’s not about gun control. It’s about common sense laws.”
…
“It’s not actually about *guns*, it’s about *control*”
“It’s not about being funny, it’s about having your monologue retweeted by political hacks masquerading as journalists”
– Jimmy Kimmel
Look, if you’re not going to follow the advice of the guy with the hind-tit late night show, whose advice are you going to follow???
Huh. Then what’s with the photograph of the pile of guns confiscated in Australia?
That’s “common sense” to him?
What about “GUN CONTROL NOW!”?
What we have here is a credibility gap that’s about a mile wide.
I just went down the fisrt few pages of Facebook
I yelled at anyone making that stupid argument and told them what I thought. I should be down to 3 or 4 friends by 5.
They weren’t really your friends.
Apparently “pay for your own medical care” isn’t common sense.
Following the constitution isn’t common sense?
Turns out Caleb Keeter, the Josh Abbot Band guitarist who “flipped” on gun control within hours of the LV massacre has always been a gun grabber:
https://twitter.com/voxday/status/915180397729865728
Limelight grandstanding fuckstains gonna be limelight grandstanding fuckstains I guess. Of course nobody in the media will ever shine any light on this.
So surprised.
The most vile person in this story is Paddock. Keeter is the second most vile, capitalizing on a tragedy that he personally witnessed literally as the bodies were still warm. And of course all the usual suspects are fawning over him.
ha. that fucker.
My internet has been down since last night. At this point either the router is just dead or my roommate didn’t pay. I honestly have no idea. Ran home for lunch and tried resetting again. Still nothing. That was attempt 7 by me.
Ill get you up to speed: Cal lost to Oregon, 45-24.
I was out of town, so it never happened.
Of course they should be able to leave.
As playa notes, many in the area might want to stay.
Any secession by voting should be done in the smallest area possible (county or town or neighborhood) and since it’s peaceful, there should be a timetable to freely mmove between the two new countries. That way people can have some time to move across town into the old country, or vice versa.
Sorry to go OT again. If anyone wants to use my numbers for gun control arguments feel free. It took 4 and half months start to finish. It was $1031.25 including 400 rounds of 9mm.
Oh. It was more. I forgot to include ear protection in that. $1064.18
Ooh! Ooh!
1. ) Absolutely, although I’d like to see the vote conducted such that as few people as possible who wanted to remain Spanish were caught in between. Maybe some sort of polycentric legal system could help with that.
2.) I think when the Spanish national government tells them to shut up and keep the money coming, the move is to go Galt. Civil disobedience is going to get them farther than violent revolution, I think.
3.) I’ve got a family, so I’m not going to risk their safety or comfort. What I’d do is offer as much support to more active revolutionaries as I could and interact with the national government as little as possible. I believe it’s called “Irish democracy”. And that takes the form of everything from refusing to offer up information to authorities, to avoiding transactions where tax revenue is generated, to actively ignoring laws and regulations as much as possible (I mean like making moonshine and jaywalking, not bombing police stations).
1) Maybe. But the Spanish Constitution ratified in 1978 specifically talks about Spanish unity and doesn’t provide for an exit. So they basically have the same problem as States in the Union. There’s no current constitutional way to exit short of a Constitutional Convention. I’m not sure if the Spanish have an amendment process.
Dammit, Brett! It’s a Constitution, not a suicide pact.
51 minutes before entering the domain of the Florida man (and woman). Forgot my safari jacket and pith helmet at home.
As long as you can fake a relatively good David Attenborough or Jacques Cousteau accent, I’m sure you’ll be fine.
Crikey!
Welcome to Thunder Dome, Bitch!
OT: There are photos that purport to be of shithead’s hotel suite with him ventilated in it. In those, obviously unofficial photos, among other things, are a rifle with a bump fire stock, a metric shit ton of Surefire 100 rd 5.56 mags, a bunch of rifles period, and what looks like a suicide note on the table near him, held in place with what looks like either an ashtray or a roll of greenish duct tape. Oh, and he supposedly video’d himself during the attack.
Re, the 72 minutes, it may be that he killed himself after the first encounter with hotel security and cops. I.e., well before SWAT even got there.
I have no idea how long he was shooting at the crowd though. Eventually, one of the autists will sync up the videos with some sort of timeline.
I’ve only see 2 pics of the weapons, neither of which had a slide stock for bump fire.
Where did you see them?
Purportedly originally from 4chan. I saw them at arfcom; this post therein is a decent summary. Scroll to “images from the room”.
I wouldn’t know a bump fire stock w/o holding it, but the commentariat there seems to think the eotech’d rifle has one.
And yeah, not only did he video himself, he had wireless cameras in the hall to get a jump on police and security.
he had wireless cameras in the hall to get a jump on police and security.
Ouch. Unless you spotted them and took them out immediately, the first people to respond were in serious trouble.
You’d think the suicide note would be of great importance.
I bet they didn’t want to touch anything until the FBI went through it with a fine tooth comb.
I want to know what the suicide note says. There’s your first clue as to motive.
Hey Ken, (and sorry for continually screwing up spelling your last name), I’ve mentioned before that I like your theory that he was a compulsive gambler, and this was his way of lashing out, but how would you square that with him still having all of these very valuable assets like a transferable full auto? I had thought most compulsive gamblers would sell any and everything—even if they didn’t own it—to get enough cash for one more bet. A transferable full auto, which, even if it were something like a drop in auto sear, would still be something like 10 grand plus, doesn’t sound like something he’d have hung onto.
If you listen to that radio broadcast I linked the other day, the casino will give you loans with very little due diligence. They did it to the lady in the radio story. They kept enticing her to come back and gamble–after she’d had to declare bankruptcy because of her gambling.
The casinos only go after those loans once you stop gambling. I suspect he may have burned through the last of his loans with them. They don’t go after your assets until you have nothing liquid to gamble anymore.
Also, they’ll make loans against residences and things–right there from the casino. They do a title search, and you’re good to go. As part of the loan, you agree to have all cases tried in Nevada, and Nevada courts are merciless when it comes to collecting gambling debts.
I don’t think you’d need to lose every last penny you have before you go nuts. Lose all of it or almost all of it, and that would make me go nuts–although I would never hurt anyone. Somebody may have bee likely to go over the edge eventually.
[I’m gonna tell a story in another post about people losing it]
I just see a guy–whose story as a high roller was exactly the same as the lady in the radio story–hurting the casino where he gambled and taking it out on something they always enticed him to the casino with (they had enticed him with free tickets to country-western festival shows, many times before, I gather) and it makes sense–in the way a psychopathic murderer can make sense. He was lashing out at his comps.
Anyway, did you give that story a listen?
https://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/466/blackjack?act=3
If you push play at that link, it starts at exactly the beginning of ACT 2, “Harrah’s Today, Gone Tomorrow”. Listen to it, and I bet you see it all the way I do. They did everything to that lady that they did with this guy. It’s just that in that lady’s case, they got a nice person. In this wacko guy, they fucked with a psychopath.
Listen to the story. 25 minutes long. I listened to it again, and thought, “What were the chances that they did the same exact thing to this guy as they did to the lady in that story–and it had nothing to do with him going over the edge? Anyway, don’t listen to me talk about the story. Listen to the story! Hear the lady this happened to tell you the story herself.
[Story about someone losing it]
I have some family and other ties to Las Vegas. The following story happened to a guy I met. He went to the same church as someone in my family.
So, anyway, this guy’s dad was a prospector. He grew up out in the desert between Barstow and Las Vegas with his dad. Originally his dad went out there looking for silver, I guess, but he ended up mining for zinc and living on their claim. There aren’t any towns out there, but every once in a while, you’ll see a bunch of truck tracks trailing off of the 15, or maybe past one of those turnouts for a major mine like on Zyzzx Road. There are old prospectors living out there in the desert mining for things and making a little bit here and there.
So, anyway, when this guy was a kid, some guy in a Mercedes pulled down their dirt road. A guy in a suit got out, and he explained that he was a lawyer from Los Angeles. It seems the prospector had acquired the mineral rights for silver, whathaveyou, but he’d never legally acquired the rights for zinc. So the lawyer had bought those rights out from under his claim and was now the owner of those mineral rights. The lawyer told the prospector that he would sell him the rights–but it might as well have been a billion if it was a few thousand dollars. The prospector couldn’t afford it. Then the lawyer served the prospector with an order telling him to stop mining zinc, and he told them that he was sending a crew out to the claim to start mining zinc professionally in a couple of weeks. He told the prospector he could mine for anything that wasn’t zinc.
The lawyer was apparently going for a weekend in Las Vegas from LA, anyway, and he thought it would be kind of an adventure to go out into the desert and serve the papers himself on the way!
The old miner pulled out a .357 magnum and shot the lawyer six times in the chest. He then went back inside for bullets and reloaded twice–shooting the lawyer in the chest 18 times in total. Then he took the lawyer’s dead body and set it up in a lawn chair by the side of Interstate 15 on the way to Vegas. He put a sign around the dead lawyer’s chest that read, “This is what we do to claim jumpers”.
The guy’s dad is doing a life sentence for murder.
Moral of the story: Different people play by different rules. There are people in this world who would rather go to prison or kill themselves and and/or other people than go down without making a mark on the people they blame for screwing them. And you don’t always know who those wildcards are–not just by looking at them. Some people will kill you for sleeping with their ex-wife or kicking their dog. Some people will take a tremendous amount of punishment before they realize they have nothing left but a desire to hurt those who they think have mistreated them. And there are real psychopaths in this world. They aren’t playing by the same rules as the rest of us.
Why would a largely undemocratic elitist power structure already reeling from Brexit and upstart anti-immigrant interests in Germany back the autonomy of separatists?
Its isn’t just that someone needs to point out why the EU is worth more than it costs. The EU needs to actually be worth more than it costs.
And the sacrifice of autonomy at the local level isn’t a benefit. It’s a cost.
Free movement within the EU was a benefit–until they started letting in refugees by the millions, now everyone sees that as a cost, too. And it actually is a cost.
The benefits of free trade across borders within the EU are just as real as they ever were, but I wonder how many EU bureaucrats really believe in that?
I bet socialist politicians and bureaucrats making the case for free trade in the EU would come across like damning it with faint praise. How can socialists really sell free trade like they believe in it if they don’t even believe in free markets inside their own country?
The benefits of free trade across borders within the EU are just as real as they ever were,
And not something you need the EU for, either.
I suspect each country might go protectionist separately.
They made mistakes with monetary union (on purpose) with its implementation. France wouldn’t consent to Germany’s reunification unless Germany agreed to let France, effectively, piggy back on the strength of the Deutschmark in the EC–without any budgetary control over France (and others). Like I said, you could say that was a big mistake for Germany, but if France insisted on it, it wasn’t a mistake. (And if it weren’t for the other EU countries keeping Germany’s currency cheaper than it would be otherwise, Germany wouldn’t be such an export powerhouse, too).
Anyway, there are benefits, but since there are very few honestly pro-capitalist European politicians, I don’t think the people in power are really making the case for them. They just don’t believe in it, really.
I suppose we’re looking at the same kind of transformation in American society–only in slow motion. From before the Russian revolution, left and right in American politics was always about revolutionary socialism (and communism) on the left and capitalism on the right–going back to 19th century. Aren’t we always bemoaning now how the Republicans aren’t really about capitalism anymore? Nowadays, with the fall of the Soviet Union, left and right seem to be about stances on minorities and immigration. That’s where they are in Europe, it seems, only more so.
The people on the right in Europe are protectionists and economic nationalists. Their economics is about stuff like “They took our jobs”.
It was easier for people to understand capitalism as the opposite of communism. That’s just not the line of division anymore. Seems like they’re/we’re settling for democratic socialism.
Lets ask the question nobody wants to ask: If the Catalans manage to do this, will they have to for their own football league, or will FC Barcelona still be able to play in La Liga?
There are cases like Monaco and Cardiff, but I can totally see Spain telling Barcelona to suck it (especially if the people making the call had Madrid connections.) And I could equally see ‘mas que un club’ telling La Liga to suck it.
Then the question is how UEFA handles a Catalan league with only a handful of genuine first tier clubs (Barcelona, Espanyol, and, uh…)
It’s like the SEC or the NFC East.
You want good teams in your division, and you want your rivals in your division.