Category: Satire

  • But without government, who would build the People’s House?

     

    Derp, unlike oil, is a resource no country truly lacks. Now I would not dream of going for the crown of the Derpetologist, but I am not above sharing some fine vintage local derp. Now, as in all places, we are spoiled for choice around here, derp wise. But I gave a good long 30 seconds worth of thought about it and decided to go with something representative.

    You may not have heard, but Romania had a bit o’ ye olde communism going on a while ago. It may have been in the news over there, not that we got news back then. Anyway the fellar leading us through the multilaterally developed socialist utopia was a quasi-illiterate former cobbler called Nicky Ceausescu. Ol Nick presided over a country where food was a luxury, heating your apartment on a bitterly cold winter day a dream, and leaving the Utopia for the evil western countries a risky endeavor. Because what says Utopia like risking your life trying to get out?

    Whenever communism is criticized – and believe you me there is plenty to go around- the death, the torture, the oppression, lack of basic goods and lack of liberty – the great counterargument rears its ugly head. Well, someone will say, at least Ceausescu built something. Apartment buildings and industry!! Apartments in hideous brutalist concrete shells. Tiny, difficult to heat, crowded. Narrow alleys, no parking – the proles didn’t need cars, a capitalist affectation – no parks or green spaces. But build them he did, a great act of urban renewal that lead to entire neighborhoods being flattened after the inhabitants were unceremoniously kicked out of their homes. There might be a mayor or two outside Romania who would give this a try given the chance.

    Great Industry was built– randomly, badly placed, horribly inefficient and creating almost nothing of quality.  But it was built. And then it rusted. But everyone had a job! Well, yes, people did pretend work for pretend pay. Everyone had a job; food was scarcer, but jobs were to be had by all, for all the good that did.

    In Bucharest there is one of the largest buildings in the world. It is officially called Palace of the Parliament now, but most Romanians still call it by the communist moniker of The People’s house, or Casa Poporului in the local language.

    Now where the derp got truly amusing was when I heard the argument: without a big government could Romania have built Casa Poporului when it did? The argument was followed, amusingly, by a bit of almost self-awareness. The guy actually told me “I don’t want to hear about the need or efficiency of the building, but the principle stands that you need big government for large project such as that.”

    For what was before there, if anyone is interested, you can see more here (not my blog/pictures).

    So I ask you, libertarians, without big government could you evict hundreds of families, tear down their homes, and waste a tremendous amount of very scarce resources a poor country could ill afford in order to build a megalomaniac’s wet dream of a pointless slab of concrete full of marble and gilded chandeliers, without bothering to ask questions of its need or efficiency. Well, my humble answer would be no. How the bloody hell is that a bad thing?

    Funny enough, as a country gets rich enough, you will have some big pointless stuff being build, by rich people using their own money. But probably not to the scale of the Peoples House and probably not in the stage of development Romania was in.

    Also, the Danube to Black Sea canal would definitely not have been built. That is the place where the enemies of the revolution were sent to dig hard soil by using spades and shovels, with evening beatings as the recreation and leisure part of the day, and starvation level diets to avoid obesity and diabetes and such. No one knows how many died at the Canal, and how many lived in fear of being sent to the Canal for no apparent reason. So I ask you this, without Big government, who would send the wreckers to dig the canal, huh? Checkmate, libertarians.

  • The Importance of Political Parties

    Ronald Reagan switched from Democrat to Republican in 1962. Hillary Clinton was a member of the College Republicans before becoming a Democrat in 1968. Rick Perry switched from Democrat to Republican in 1989. Elizabeth Warren switched from Republican to Democrat in 1996. These examples illustrate the great importance of the political parties as a trustworthy sign of what a politician really believes.

    But political parties serve an even more important role: they tell us who we should reflexively hate. Without political parties, voters would be forced to evaluate politicians based on the results of their policies instead mindlessly rooting for their team. Chaos would inevitably ensue.

    And don’t get me started about 3rd parties. You shouldn’t vote for them because they won’t get enough votes. Circular logic is fun because circular logic is fun!

    This country has a two-party system. It says so right in the Constitution. I think it’s between the part that talks about the separation of church and state and the part that says only people in a well-regulated militia are allowed to have guns.

    Here’s how it works: if you vote and your candidate wins, your vote is an implicit agreement to whatever happens next. And if you vote for someone else and they lose, you agree to bound by the decision of the majority by participating in the election. And if you don’t vote, you have no right to complain because the only legitimate form of protest is to vote. So you agree to whatever politicians do whether you vote or not. This is called “consent of the governed.” It’s one of those phrases like “living dead” or “quiet riot” that sounds funny if you think about it too much.

    My advice is to only vote for flip-floppers. It’s the safest bet because statistically speaking, you’ll get what you want about half the time.

  • How to Understand the Middle East

    That’s not how carpets work

    For most Americans, the Middle East is an exotic and mysterious place. Like the Persian carpets made there, it is a complex weave of nations, tribes, languages, and religions. And like a Persian carpet, you can’t pull on one thread without pulling on many others.

    However, if you study the history of the region, certain patterns emerge. I studied the history and cultures of the region for many years until I had my eureka moment. I had discovered what I call the Grand Unified Theory of the Middle East. It is a unifying principle which explains every event there since the beginning of history. Once you learn this theory, you will instantly understand everything that happens there.

    Here is my Grand Unified Theory of the Middle East: Everyone hates everyone.

    The Arabs and Persians hate each other. The Turks and the Kurds hate each other.The Sunni and the Shia hate each other. The Bedouins and the Berbers hate each other. The Muslims and Christians hate each other. And all of them hate the Jews. The Jews, not wanting to be outdone in the hating game, boldly up the ante by hating both themselves and other Jews, mostly because they are either too Jewish or not Jewish enough.

    Democracy at work

    Could this geopolitical dumpster fire possibly get any worse? Yes, it can! Democracy in the Middle East, where it exists at all, tends to get into a rut. Generally, there is a two-party system which is a fierce duel between the Islamic Party of Islam for Muslims against the Very Very Very Islamic Party. In such a situation, it is difficult to find common ground.

    So what should the US do? I suggest treating the place like a nest of killer bees. The farther away you are, the less likely you are to get stung. And if you insist on getting close and throwing rocks at the hive, throw really big rocks. In 1983, Reagan withdrew US forces from Lebanon after a truck bomb killed 241 Marines. He said:

    “Perhaps we didn’t appreciate fully enough the depth of the hatred and the complexity of the problems that made the Middle East such a jungle. Perhaps the idea of a suicide car bomber committing mass murder to gain instant entry to Paradise was so foreign to our own values and consciousness that it did not create in us the concern for the marines’ safety that it should have.”