"These men will not be hindered from accomplishing at their best speed the distance which they have to do, either by snow or rain or heat or by darkne"These men will not be hindered from accomplishing at their best speed the distance which they have to do, either by snow or rain or heat or by darkness of night". So wrote the Greek historian Herodotus in describing the Persian postal system under King Darius.
It became the unofficial motto of the US Postal system, to which the reader might add, after finishing "Neither Snow Nor Rain" by Devin Leonard "whatever your best speed, it will never be fast enough"
Leonard's book is a frolicking fountain of philatelical fun facts. Oh, and by the way, thank God for Amazon. ...more
I read "It Can't Happen Here" because I had heard that with the election of Donald Trump, the 1935 book was experiencing a dramatic uptick in circulatI read "It Can't Happen Here" because I had heard that with the election of Donald Trump, the 1935 book was experiencing a dramatic uptick in circulation due to the supposed similarities between the fictional America fascist leader in the book and our new President.
While there may be some superficial similarities in terms of style, the actual policy prescriptions of Berzelius "Buzz" Windrip are much more leftish than Trumpish.
Windrip is a charismatic, fast rising Democratic Senator from Illinois who is successfully elected President by advocating popular but economically disastrous redistributive policies that run over the Constitution. He bypasses and ignores the Congress. His desire for control dictates ever bigger and intrusive government.
OK, so there's a somewhat more-than-surface similarity to Trump's immediate predecessor and Windrip's immediate predecessor, Franklin Roosevelt, but I wouldn't call them fascist dictators.
Likewise the "Trump is/will be a dictator like Windrip" comparison can only be arrived at through hysteria.
Can it happen here? Unlikely. And given Sinclair Lewis' improbable and somewhat hokey narration of events, through the eyes of one Doremus Jessup it would seem well nigh impossible.
Still, if you can suspend a grip on reality, it makes for a tolerable story.
In "Men Without Work", Nicholas Eberstadt roundly documents the ever increasing number of men who have elected to disengage from the American workforcIn "Men Without Work", Nicholas Eberstadt roundly documents the ever increasing number of men who have elected to disengage from the American workforce. In this regard he has made "America's Invisible Crisis" less invisible. This is an important starting point and it being his primary aim in this thin volume, he is successful.
Beyond documenting the problem, Eberstadt makes a number of plausible hypotheses as to why labor force participation has plummeted among American men but with less clear documentation. His prescriptions for dealing with the problem is even less fleshed out. This should not, however, be viewed as a failing, but rather an invitation for others to investigate and debate. In fact, Ebersadt kicks off the debate with the publication of two dissenting points of view and a response corresponding to the last three chapters of the book.
Traditional American Priority: Liberty. Leftist Priority: Equality of Outcome.
Because of the leftist priority weLiberty verses Equality of Outcome.
Traditional American Priority: Liberty. Leftist Priority: Equality of Outcome.
Because of the leftist priority we get the "War against the 1%". "Let's take what the top produces". Their argument? The top doesn't produce, they take. Edward Conrad in his book, "The Upside of Inequality" proves conclusively that this is false. The top produces wealth and that wealth raises living standards for all... and enriches all.
Liberty verses Equality of Outcome. The two are incompatible.
Give a people liberty and some will excel.... in music, in art, in creativity, in invention, in finding markets, in making money. And some will be... well mediocre or even less than mediocre. By its nature, liberty results in inequality.
On the other hand, ensuring equality of outcome means restricting liberty. It means redistributing excellence which in reality means not rewarding it. Or penalizing it. So you get less of it... less excellence. Equality of outcome can be brought about only by restricting liberty.
Which is better?
Undoubtedly liberty and the excellence it produces. Excellence is rapidly exported... distributed... making all people richer. Liberty ensures that the innovators of excellence are rewarded. And liberty and its related innovation does a better job of ensuring that that the other sought-after virtue by both left and right-- equality of opportunity-- stands a fighting chance.
Equality of outcome? It produces at best stagnation, and at worst, as is often the case, equality of misery. Specifically it amounts to good intentions that in the end undermine the rest of society--the middle and lower classes.
That's the truth. Edward Conrad in "The Upside of Inequality" utilizes his book to give examples, data, illustrations, comparisons and anecdotes that make a compelling case in favor of liberty... even if that means, as it must, a certain degree of inequality of outcome. And he exposes the disastrous and impoverishing unintended consequences of coercive statist programs shortsightedly intended to bring about equality of outcome.
Michael Lind, in his book "Land of Promise" gives, for a book covering hundreds of years of American Economic history, a thorough review.
He divides AMichael Lind, in his book "Land of Promise" gives, for a book covering hundreds of years of American Economic history, a thorough review.
He divides Americas economic history into several divisions. Each division is marked by a substantial change in technology with a resulting time lag in government policies that respond to such technology. That this occurred is certainly accurate.
While the book is a great primer on the important events and actors in US economic history, it has a marked bias in favor of government action and intervention in positively shaping and responding to economic events.
While Lind presents evidence for his positions, they are, I think often selective or inadequately developed. Some of his propositions are that:
* Lyndon Johnson's war on poverty was a success * The middle class prospers under highly regulated capitalism and suffers under deregulation * Deregulation has generally transformed healthy industries in to "sick" industries. * Most transformative technologies in the information age were made possible by government research and development. *Minimum wage legislation has bolstered the economy, especially benefiting the middle class * High tariffs enabled the development of the economy toward manufactured products. * The Hawley-Smoot tariff did little to start or worsen the Great Depression * New Deal liberals, starting with FDR were the primary drivers behind the growth in American prosperity. * The American entry into WWII was primarily motivated by an interest in countering German imperialism. * Government subsidization of the early railroad industry was essential for its development.
I thought that the book was worth reading but because of its bias towards the benefits of government intervention in the economy, it should be balanced by reading books detailing the benefits of limited government in order to accurately ascertain Americas astonishingly successful economic history. ...more
"The Ten Things You Can't Say in America" by Larry Elder is a conversation starter for discussion with your liberal friends--- assuming you can get th"The Ten Things You Can't Say in America" by Larry Elder is a conversation starter for discussion with your liberal friends--- assuming you can get them to read it.
Why are these ten, the things you can't say in America? Because conventional political correctness, foisted upon society by the left says you can't. Why does the left preclude discussions of these ten assertions? Because if they can stop debate they can't be proved wrong, and that's a lot easier than having to argue against them.
Is there truth in the 10 things you can't say? Mostly, but I'll let you be the judge.
Larry mentions in his book the old saying that a conservative is a liberal that has been mugged by reality. One thing is for sure, in arguing his points, Larry mugs the reader with reality-- Data, anecdotes, revelations of hypocrisy on the left, testimony etc.
I think Larry could have slimmed down this book or kept it the same size but called it "The 15 Things." The book can sometimes be a little long-winded and repetitive particularity for conservatives or libertarians familiar with the arguments, but if you can just get a liberal to read it.... well, as they say repetition is the mother of learning.
He doesn't understand what made his father tick... what was behind his sometimes mysterious and even frightenin Elder had a flawed father. We all do.
He doesn't understand what made his father tick... what was behind his sometimes mysterious and even frightening actions?
Still his father set a mostly good example of what a father is... what a father does. How he protects and guides his children.
Elder is lucky to have a father... this particular father. He follows his father's example... his father,s teaching and meets with success.
But still he doesn't understand his father. In many ways, hates his father.
Then one day he sits down with his father as an adult. 8 hours he spends with him. The veil lifts. It lifts between the son's understanding of the father, and between the father's understanding of the son. There is an new, intriguing appreciation of his father. A sense that despite behavior that seems strange to a young boy there was a method, a reason and a goal in it. That in the end it was (imperfectly) enacted towards the goal of raising a productive person... a productive citizen.
Larry Elder's "Dear Father, Dear Son" re-enacts, though more dramatically, the understanding that happens with many sons lucky enough to have a good father. It may encourage some sons (and fathers) to seek out that understanding and to find reconciliation.
In our daily and life struggles, it is often difficult to see the hand of God. We take it on faith that He indeed is working out His plan for us. SomeIn our daily and life struggles, it is often difficult to see the hand of God. We take it on faith that He indeed is working out His plan for us. Sometimes, and rarely, He gives us immediate and striking confirmation of this. But most times, the confirmation of our faith comes with time..... looking back, we gain some understanding of the reasons for events that have occurred. We understand for example, that God has loved us, even when that love has taken the form of chastisement. And in this we know that we are blessed.
In the "American Miracle: Divine Providence in the Rise of the Republic" Michael Medved looks back at Americas blessed unique, exceptional and even improbable history and listens as he puts it, "for God's footsteps". Then he convincingly documents them in an exciting fashion that makes his book nearly impossible to put down. Undoubtedly, God has worked great miracles in directing the rise of this great country.
Medved states "A dictionary definition of "miracle" describes an extraordinary event manifesting divine intervention in human affairs. The rise of the American Republic qualifies on all counts."
Read this book and I think you will decidedly agree. ...more
Ronald Reagan once said, "The trouble with our Liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that just isn't so.
WhatRonald Reagan once said, "The trouble with our Liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that just isn't so.
What do Liberals know that just isn't so? Here's a small representative sample form Mark Davis' "Upside down: How the left turned right into wrong, truth into lies and good into bad."
* The Constitution requires a secular society * Fossil Fuels are bad * Birthright citizenship is in the Constitution * Our schools don't have enough money * America is a racist nation * Mankind is fundamentally good, and * Income inequality is a problem
With their dominance of the media and academia, the left has been very adept at sending these lies and half-truths flying around the world to receptive audiences. So much so, that I've no doubt that some of the slanders I've listed above seem plausible.
But the truth has finally gotten up and put on its pants, at least in Davis' tome. Using a healthy dose of logic and plain common sense Davis shatters these shibboleths, replacing them with truth and clarity. An entertaining and informative read. ...more