A Lunatic's Manifesto and Our Downfall

Our government has, through federal law, placed into the hands of a few, the power to broadcast images and sound to the entirety. These powers have been grossly abused of late by either malice or simple idiocy. I refer of course the tragedy at Virginia Tech this week. While the media is not entirely responsible for the tragedy, their incompetence, ignorance, or plain greed has led substantially to this tragedy, and probably to many others in the future.

Historically, the privilege to use the public’s airwaves was bundled with the obligation to care for the public good. This has been the foundation of network news, even when the networks were aware that they could get larger ratings by airing other programs. The violation of this public trust by NBC and the other networks in this case has been despicable. The airing of the VT lunatic-killer’s tribute of a madman should go down in media history as the most unethical, idiotic, and selfish things that could have been done.

To understand this reality, all one must do is think logically about the case. What motivates a man to send a package full of video and photos to one of the world’s largest media outlets, minutes before slaughtering 30 people? By making news of this poor pathetically deranged man, the media has fulfilled his fantasy in a way that the simple and senseless killings never could have. They have given this man a soapbox on which to spread his inane notion of reality and indeed further torment the families of the departed-victims. All of this outrageous media coverage has added further victims to the tragedy, one of which is the sense of decent and honest media coverage. The murderer even cited former killers (who have also been made media stars) in his memo of death. The fact that the inane editors at NBC could not see that the killer’s messages were a direct link to the past perversion of tragedies by the media, demonstrates clearly the depth that our media has sunk. The “spectaclization” of these tragedies is the most revolting aspect to them.

The media, almost immediately upon hearing the news of a school shooting began looking for scapegoats. Who could we as a country hang this crime on? The murderer being dead, obvious targets arose in the form of the police and school officials. The failure of the university or university police to be clairvoyant has seemed to shock many, at least among the journalists; however, these questions are simply obfuscation in order to cover the reality.

The true culprit will never be named by new outlets, because the true culprit pays for the media. All the consumers who ate up the coverage of the slayings, me included, bear a portion of the blame for these killings. Our incessant desire to know more about killers, to dissect tragedy; to find out how it could have happened, has merged with our morbid curiosity to create the monsters that seek attention the way a crack-fiend seeks money to buy his next fix. We are all so eager to find out the answers and to see the victims, that we give our attention, we watch eagerly and even hungrily as our world becomes ever more violent. That is why he had to kill thirty-two innocent people. Thirteen people killed is simply not enough to get our attention anymore.

NOTE: I have purposely left out the names of the killer in this case and those of past incidents. I think it best to forget the perpetrators when we remember the tragedies.

Fear and the Election

The number and stature of American politicians who pander to the racist and nationalist impulses within many citizens has grown greatly in recent months. With the election cycle heating up, leading democratic contenders are rushing toward the anti-trade xenophobes who quite literally hate anything perceived to be foreign.

Hillary Clinton, despite the legacy of free-trade policy that she has inherited from her husband, attacked foreign ownership of American debt this month. Clinton supposed, in a speech this past week, that the foreign investors, who own 52% of the Federal government’s debt, have “undermined our economic standing.” The solution - in her opinion – is to setup triggers, at the Federal Reserve, that will “sound an alarm bell when U.S. foreign-owned debt reaches 25% of GDP, or the trade deficit reaches 5%” (these numbers appear to be completely arbitrary). It is not entirely clear what this warning bell would do, other than codify the warnings that Fed presidents already give – though the Fed usually warns that Americans are not saving enough, not that foreign debt is inherently dangerous. Her comments did not note that the foreign ownership of debt is a direct result of American’s unwillingness to save (2006 was the first year since the depression in which America actually had a negative savings rate – around -1%). The government has done little to help, with an estimated $248 billion budget deficit.

The interesting question to consider is what the result would be if American’s were no longer allowed to borrow large amounts of money from abroad? The major impact of a ban or limitation on foreign borrowing would be on interest rates. Forced to self-finance our debt, the price of borrowing money would soar. Thus, investments that could otherwise have occurred would be crowded-out by government debt, causing an overall cooling in the economy. The limit may also cause a loss of confidence among foreign investors in their existing. The reason that Americans are able to borrow so readily on the world debt market is that people believe the American economy to be sound and their money secure. If investors were to see that Americans needed to use governmental regulation to limit the amount they borrow, there will be a perceived weakness of the economy, and a reduced willingness to hold dollar denominated assets.

Is foreign debt really dangerous? The fear among some skeptics is that the major holders of American debt might rapidly sell T-bills, causing a collapse throughout the market. The problem with this view is that these investors have a huge incentive to keep the American bond market specifically, and the American economy in general, afloat. China, being a prime example, holds around $340 billion in American Public Debt (Treasury notes and bills). Were the Chinese government to attempt to unload these treasuries in any short period of time, they would quickly run out of buyers, and the value of the treasuries would sink, not only harming the American holders of government debt, but also the Chinese government itself. Additionally, the Chinese government could not possibly want a slowdown in the American economy as the boom in China has largely been fueled by American consumption.

The real issue, that Hilary Clinton clearly missed, is the negative impact of US consumption or over-consumption. An important factor has led to this problem. It is the abundance of money (very different than an abundance of wealth). Because foreign investors are willing to finance American consumption at such an inexpensive interest rate, Americans – including the government – are willing to keep swiping that credit card. A large portion of this problem is the explosion of American entitlement programs, and along with it, the inability of the government to cut-back these programs during times of strong economic growth. These expenditures lead to huge deficits even while the government has record tax-receipts (an extended war deployment doesn’t help either). At a certain point, further financing of entitlements through government debt must become unsustainable (the tipping point is uncertain). It is likely that this turning point will occur over a period of time, interest rates will rise as investors become more risk-averse or they see American debt as more likely to go unpaid. The rise in interest rates will force people in America to both slow consumption and increase savings until a sustainable point is reached. Essentially if the problem is not solved by wiser decisions from Americans in terms of consumption, it will solve itself. The downside is that Americans are consuming today their production tomorrow. It will surely be painful, but it is surely not the fault of foreign investors.

Hillary attacked foreign investment not for actual fear that it causes instability in our economy, but because she knows that she can utilize the irrational fear of the other that so many Americans from all political perspectives seem to have. Support for free-trade (free investment is a major component) has always moved in a cyclical pattern, in most instances following the economic cycle (as people's fear of recession expands). We should be wary of people who pander to the down-cycle in order to gain an elected office.

Gas Tax - It's Truly Liberal

A not insignificant number of conservatives are just as upset with George Bush these days as the Democrats are, and for good cause. An administration which came to office with claims of limited government, spending cuts, and reliance on a free-market has devolved into a deformed, politically-pragmatic regime. It’s not difficult to find the hypocrisies that arise in the President’s policy. Not only have government expenditures continued to rise, the president passed one of the largest spending increases in Medicare history. To add insult to injury for fiscal conservatives, the Administration announced this February that it would conduct a “congestion initiative.” This proposal, which is surprisingly similar to a plan that Vice President Gore proposed during the 2000 election, not so surprisingly was exactly what Bush opposed during his first election.

The proponents of the new plan, including many democrats, claim that it is a strategy for energy independence. It calls for something called “congestion pricing,” essentially a tax on the people who commute during peak periods. The administration will dole out $175 million to cities in order to build technology which charges people more for driving during those periods more prone to congestion. A similar strategy may be used to even out air travel. If you want to go to any popular locations, you just have to be a bit richer. The rational is that congestion causes inefficiencies both in delay to commuters and also in our use of energy. Congestion leading to inefficiency is a point that with which nearly any person could agree; however, solving this problem by using federal tax dollars to help state and local authorities set additional taxes seems to be a tad inefficient in itself.

For a Presidency which has consistently called for American’s to allow market principles to lead the economy, it seems rather inconsistent to use a highly targeted tax to try to solve this problem, especially when an elegantly simple solution has, many times before, been proposed.

A Real Solution to our Energy Problems

It is important first to consider that any market economy will have externalities. The burning of petroleum includes a major externality. A person driving his car, paying $2.09 a gallon for gasoline does not pay the complete cost. We know that the process of breaking down petroleum products, through burning, produces environmental pollutants, with which all of society must then deal. While we cannot accurately determine the value that the man driving his car is consuming through his burning of petroleum (because it is difficult to put a cost on something that affects so many people indirectly), we can assume that it does have some value because we know that the smog created bothers people (there may also be a cost due to what people refer to as Global Climate Change). This means that the man driving his car gets a surplus that comes from the individuals in his community; because of this surplus, the driver burns more petroleum (he drives more, or drives less efficiently) than he would if we could find a way to charge him for the surplus that he is gaining from the public. Let’s assume that the cost to society is an additional $0.50 per gallon. Taken in aggregate, the amount of gasoline demanded at $2.09 is significantly more than that demanded at $2.59. Moreover, a substantial increase in the cost paid for gasoline may cause demand actually to shift. This happens when people make life style changes that permanently alter the way they life and the gasoline they demand. We have seen that, with past increases in the cost of oil such as the oil shocks of the 1970s, people do react to large price increases in gasoline by altering their consumption habits (in the short-term demand for gasoline is highly inelastic, in the long-term elasticity increases greatly). This elasticity was demonstrated during the 1970s oil-shock which brought a significant change in the type of vehicle that Americans drive, a shift toward more fuel efficient vehicles. If the government were to recover, in some gradual way, the external costs of gas consumption, these demand effects would certainly take place. The resources that would be diverted away from gasoline consumption would not likely become savings for Americans (because we, as a country, don’t save). It would be spent on alternate methods of getting to the place they were going: trains, buses, ox-carts, etc. The funds collected by the government, from those who chose to continue their demand for gasoline, could be used as a capital fund to help with start-up costs involved in infrastructure changes, such as new rail, light-rail, and bus lines. Additionally, it would impose upon people increased economic advantage gained from car-pooling, bike-riding, and walking.

Let’s look at a theoretical supply and demand curve. In this situation we have gasoline at an equilibrium price of $2.09 and an equilibrium quantity of Q1. If the government imposed a $0.5 tax per gallon, the price would be artificially raised to $2.59 and the quantity consumed would fall to Q2. Notice that this drop is not very significant in the short-term. This is because of the inelasticity of demand – as demonstrated by the angle of the demand curve (D1).

Over time though, as economists put it - in the long-run, people’s decisions lead them away from their petroleum dependence (They will buy a more fuel efficient car, invest in a train pass, or begin riding a bike to work), this elasticity will grow, and also the demand curve will shift toward the origin (D2). Supply would also contract in an attempt to secure prices over a long period of time. Since petrolium supply is - not in any real sense - competitive, the supply would certainly contract so that OPEC countries could maintain premiums per barrel of oil (S2). This difference can be noted in the movement of gasoline quantity from Q2 to Q3.

A tax of this kind could be increased over time to continue the effect of reducing our use of environmentally harmful fuels. Additionally, a portion of the proceeds could be used to establish a fund for low-interest loans to states and municipalities to increase commuter infrastructure in order to give people suitable alternatives to gasoline. The remainder could be used to cut taxes in other areas so that the overall impact on the economy would be lessened.

Not only would the gasoline tax significantly impact congestion on our roads, a similar tax on all petroleum would impact the way we produce our energy for other needs. We saw during the post-Katrina spike in oil prices that suddenly there were many alternatives which were cost-effective. Alternatives such as bio-fuels, solar-energy, nuclear power, and hydro-power become very real solutions to our energy needs. All of these energies come in ready supply within our borders (though they often have significant costs of their own).

Let's finally have an energy policy that is not only green, but also very much in tune with market discipline.

If You’re Going to San Francisco, Be Sure to Wear Your Wallet in Your Pocket

The following article was written as a form of therapy for the criminally deranged. Though the events are true, and the people are stupid…. actually no, the events are true, and the people are stupid, I couldn’t think of a silver lining.

________________________________________________________

This blog entry is dedicated to the story of my descent into the depredation of street crime. What could push an otherwise friendly, outgoing young man to commit such deceitful acts? Well, prepare for this story of desperation, frustration, and despair…all in the jungle of San Francisco.

The beginning of this life journey from honors student to common thug is surprisingly a tale of two Rutgers students. I am, as I have just noted, the villain in this diabolical twist of evil with terrible destiny. The second man is one of extreme integrity, a pillar of the community, and above all a man’s man. For the sake of anonymity we will call this lad Greg P., wait, no no, that’s too obvious for those of you who know the situation, lets just call him G. Parnas (ah Simpson’s references have an extremely long half-life in my sense of humor). Here is a photo of his license to avoid confusion.

This photo is not a violation of Greg's privacy for one important reason, he had no expectation of privacy in this situation, you will see why as we move forward through the Chronic-what-cles of Parnia (Another bad reference I know, but I wrote this on a red-eye from San Francisco, so feel free to be generous here with a laugh). I did, however, redact several portions of the license due to moral considerations and leaving for the possibility that Greg's family has some decency.

The reader will understand why it would be morally wrong for me to allow you to confuse this person with anyone else as the story develops. Additionally, it should be noted, to save the dense some shame, that the photograph of his license is being used here as a foreshadowing device.

Although I will not tell you that Greg is a bigoted idiot who honestly believes racial profiling to be a good policy or is a person who sleeps on airplane seat cushions while drooling on the seat (This pose was to satisfy Greg’s ex post facto complaint that he “Can’t sleep in any other position”, the criminals in our group still actually believe that it was because he likes to be close to the resting place of some odd 10,000 Asses, adding to the validity of this argument was the fact that his head was only an inch away from another perso

ns ass, this certainly adds weight to my gang’s argument). It is important, however, for character development, to note that the young lad has never lost an argument in his life; this astonishing record largely is a result of anecdotal evidence acquired during his “Birth Right” trip to Israel, but Greg is humble about this Universal Truth granted to him by wealthy Jewish-donors.

The story also includes two minor characters; nonetheless they happened to be roughly equivalent to Greg in intelligence (Obviously this means that their brilliance cannot be described using the banal language of normal humans, much less, that of a common criminal). For the sake of expediency, we will call these persons Adorable, Selfless, and often Sensuous 1 and 2. (We can abbreviate these apt names to ASS 1 and ASS 2: Pictured Below). Let us assign ASS 1 to the brunette and ASS 2 to the blond. To tell you the truth that wasn't really expedient at all, it was really for the fun of it but it ends up being much easier for the reader to tell who are the good guys and the bad guys in the story. Obviously they are good and I am bad.

Now, to begin our examination of the events leading up to my rejection of Kantian ethics and Lockean property theory. We begin just after the closing ceremony of a UN conference at Berkeley. Yes I am a dork, but all of the characters in the story were there voluntary, thus we have parity. Sitting conversing pleasantly in the lobby, myself and several of the other disreputable members of the organization were unaware of the criminal conspiracy into which we were about to enter. Also without knowledge of our evil designs, ASS 1 and ASS 2 came over to us, after leaving their delay-fully(SIC)-overloaded luggage (ASS 2's luggage was so heavy they wouldn't let it on the airplane and we had to wait for her, though not for overly long, it is still pretty funny) with the bellhop, ASS 2 told us that she was “Leaving right now” stating that she had already purchased a bus pass and we all had to leave immediately. Not quite knowing what she was talking about, the rest of us followed, though we were all pretty hungry, and I think I can speak for the majority here, we vagabonds were hoping to steal some lunch the near future.

ASS 2 began to speed walk down to a bus stop (This thoughtful notion was designed to form a more cohesive unit of people who would not easily be fractured…the best laid plans…) leaving us trailing behind to plot various sinister machinations with the crazy lady warning us not to take her picture, even though no one was even holding a camera. Lucky for ASS 2 she was able to capture a bus before we were stranded, although most of us had to run desperately to catch up with her.

Once on the bus, the real criminality began. Myself and the group of fiends schemed to split a wedge in the group. “How to best do this?” we thought. Our plan ended up being speaking jovially to one another in a delicious attempt to force ASS 1 and ASS 2 to sit whispering and laughing at how devious my gang was being. We knew that by making the two ASSes act childishly, we could coerce a split of the group and achieve our dastardly and devilish drive to eat lunch, possibly with dessert. This is where my truly conniving self began to form. Before you understand how terrible I truly was on this day, we need to talk about the pandemic known as Wallet Frustration; this is sometimes referred to by true experts as Wallet Utilization Sans Sanity (WUSS).

Some may assert that wallet frustration, or the WUSS epidemic, is not a real problem, but the morons who deny this enormous “discomfort” are like people who claim that cheerleading is not a true sport, WUSSes know the truth! A money storage device can form a wallet sized area of pain and suffering throughout many young men’s bodies. Victims of WUSS syndrome will often attempt to, as the skeptics say, “Pawn” their wallets off on other people to save themselves of this tremendous discomfort. The real miracle is that all men are not WUSSes (This is the informal usage of the acronym, though it is still wildly accepted among professionals in the Wallet Frustration field).

The most devastating effect of the WUSS disease is that lowlifes, such as me, are willing to sweep in to take the all of the assets from the Wallet-Frustrated, rendering the average WUSS completely useless. You might, however, be surprised by the methods necessary to accomplish the task of making a WUSS useless. Understand that WUSSes are used to having people try to rob them. Sadly, they have endured years of being easy marks, so one cannot simply ask for a WUSS’s wallet, that’s far too simple. However, this apparent obstacle was easily surmounted by my sharp criminal mind. Rather than asking for the wallet, I played hard to get, by barely speaking to our WUSS in question, Greg Parnas. When the pain of Greg’s wallet discomfort overtook him, as a result of an onerous 20 minute bus ride, he came to me like a bee to honey; more accurately like a wuss (sic) to a large intelligent man when scared for his safely in the big city. But, Greg is no wuss, he’s a victim of WUSS syndrome, therefore the lure of my ignoring him was too great to fight. He asked me, “Can I put my wallet in your bag.” Knowing that the WUSS might grow suspicious if I readily accepted his offer, I declined several times. This reverse psychology is quite powerful when used on a serious WUSS victim. Pretty soon he was obnoxiously begging me to put his wallet in my bag. HA, and I had him thinking that I just did it to make him shut up so I could ride my bus in peace! I know now that my devious actions were wrong, but a WUSS is prey that a man cannot simply walk away from. You should understand the reverse psychology that I deviously used establishes thoughts of “Mobile ATM” in the minds of a true WUSS. The WUSS thinks, “Wow I can have a large man carry my money and dispense it as I need it? What more could a short-little WUSS want?”

Viola! Another silly WUSS loses his wallet. I told you that Wallet Frustration was a serious disease, ranking up there with the male species' slightly less serious malady, erectile dysfunction.

(I photoshopped this picture using scenes from Alice in Wonderland and a picture I took months ago of the Verrazano Bridge, obviously)

As we arrived at the Golden Gate Bridge, my intrigue was in full effect. Parnas the WUSS had no idea that he was about to befall a fate worse than actually carrying his own wallet. This is where the plan of my gang to split from the ASSes and my plan to misappropriate the funds of a genuine WUSS combines seamlessly into our ultimate and terrible plan. To begin I was pretending to take pictures of the bay area, knowing all along that a couple ASSes and a WUSS cannot stop from climbing to the top of the bridge. In this manner, I was able to avoid knowing that the group had split, that a meeting point was set, or that Greg needed his wallet back. In the absence of this information, which I purposely avoided, I was able to “innocently” prepare to go get lunch, with all of the WUSSes assets in my evil clutches. When I later told people of the situation they asked me rather obtusely, “Didn’t the ASSes and WUSS have an obligation to ask you if you wanted to wait for them until they got back down from the bridge?” Silly question, keep in mind, that in a WUSS’s thought pattern, his designated ATM would obviously wait for him wherever he wanted. It isn’t the WUSS’s fault that it would be too painful to walk up a bridge with his wallet; people should be kind enough to serve him according to his needs. This situation means that it was somewhat like stealing candy from a baby. Well actually usually a baby puts up more of a fight over candy to be honest with you, this WUSS just walked off without his wallet and without discussing a manner in which to get it back. Now if that were a normal person and not a WUSS that would be incredibly inane. Leaving yourself economically dependent on a person, and abandoning that person without telling him anything about the plan, would be the apparent action of a complete and utter moron with no conception of responsibility. However, for a WUSS this situation likely happens all the time, and he deserves pity not blame. Often a WUSS will have his mommy or daddy carry his wallet (people that would willingly act as the sort of mobile ATMs that a WUSS needs); however, in the absence of his parents, the WUSS is incredibly vulnerable, to the point that he seems to have an abnormally low IQ. Still, we took advantage of poor Greg and abandoned five members of the group, some might have thought that I was the abandoned one, but anyone who thinks that is dumb.

Now we all know that five people in a city will surely die if one is left wallet-less, even if that person is a WUSS. Lending money surely could not have saved them…that’s just an idiotic plan. So during my call to Greg, in order to give him the old thief’s line, “I’ll give you your wallet back when we meet up later, borrow money for now,” the WUSS came out swinging. “So essentially you’re stealing my wallet! Just wait for me at the bottom of the bridge!” Well, I was incensed that he had discovered my evil plan so I told him what amounted to a large number of base threats and ended by saying, “You can’t call me a thief, I’m gunna (parentally censored) take you down a notch.” This rhetoric is usually enough to stifle a WUSS’s complaints, and sure enough Greg hung up on me. There was certainly reason for someone to question my moral values, since I had intended to swindle that little WUSS the whole time! Now in order to prevail in the situation I needed to get far away, So we pretended that we were still hungry, hopped in a cab and drove over the bridge; thus leaving the two ASSes, the WUSS, and two innocents on the bridge to die, OR so we thought! Soon we learned that a group of five people can survive with a wallet-less WUSS. This turn of events was quite troubling, as my gang of hooligans enjoyed burgers across the bay from San Francisco through the use of WUSS funds, we thought about the possibilities of ending up on Alcatraz Island, permanently. We secretly put back all of his money and belongings and planned to return the wallet to the WUSS as if it were all a misunderstanding precipitated by an idiotic and irresponsible move on Greg’s part.

These are before and after pictures of the WUSS’s ransacked wallet. Say hi to him if you see the dude, also please apologize to him for my depravity (BTW I did not actually write on his DL, that's digital, fools).

Afterward the ASSes became even more ASS-like, the WUSS actually carried his wallet and E. Martin DeLuca (Whom I now call Chairman Mao) forced an Airline co-pilot to be late to the airport, causing the genius, ASS 1, to miss a class, fail a test, and therefore not graduate (Curse Martin for the lost potential brilliance!). She proceeded to bemoan this tragedy for the next hour on the airplane while others, including myself, tried to rudely sleep away our worries. This fate could land on any genius who is also an ASS or WUSS…

DISCLAIMER: The above events are all completely true, verifiable by multiple witnesses (Feel free to leave testimonials in the comments section, you all know who you are). In light of this fact, it is the purpose of the author to build sympathy for the individual who had his wallet, “stolen.” The author bears no responsibility for the actions of individuals who would wish further emotional stress for this victim of the high crimes and misdemeanors that were clearly perpetrated by the author. All names were...hell I just used his name because I am mostly uncreative and I wanted to use the “Parnia” joke however lame it may have been.

"The Revolution Will Not Be Televised"

Nope, it will be neatly encapsulated in a short documentary and sold for $25(US) on this site - http://www.venezuelasolidarity.org.uk/ven/web/dvd/dvd.html. Thank the free-market for allowing socialists to distribute their propaganda!

Letter to an Anti-War Group

After a long abscence I have published something. This is a letter that I am sending to an organization which unites anti-war groups at colleges throughout the country.
_____________________________________________
"Journalists have uncovered a Pentagon list of antiwar protests and meetings considered 'threats.' The leaked document is over 400 pages long and covers events over a 10-month period. This proves that the Pentagon is conducting surveillance of antiwar activities on a national scale. " - CAN Website http://www.campusantiwar.net
_____________________________________________

After reading your information concerning the military scrutiny the anti-war campaigns have been, one thing seems to become abundantly clear, and that is: SO WHAT?

There seems to be two pieces of information in particular that are paramount in considering whether the military is wrong in this situation.

First, have any laws been broken? It seems to me that the information that the military gathered was of the type that would be public in any case, and as such no law concerning privacy was broken. If I were to shout out that I am going to stop all military recruitment on my campus, I also should not be very concerned when the military becomes aware of this information. It is not illegal, or even unreasonable, for the government to take interest in possible threats to its ability to recruit new members of the military. It seems that maybe Campus Anti-CAN should take a look at its membership in terms of security leaks. Additionally, if you open up protests to the public, as is the case at Rutgers University, organizers should assume that the military would be interested in this information. It is possible that sympathizers would warn the military of possible action.

The second piece of information is that the military appears to be using the information to consider whether a threat to its recruitment is constitutionally protected or not. It has not always been the true that anti-war protestors were entirely peaceful. This being the case, it is indeed reasonable for the military to protect itself from pernicious assaults on its ability to operate. Since recruitment is essential to military operations, it would be prudent for the military to protect recruitment activities from unconstitutional threats, considering that it maintains the constitutional responsibility of carrying out orders given to it by the executive. The information gathered was simply assessing these threats. It is also prudent that civil officials have the police forces necessary on location to maintain order in the event of a large protest. I applaud public officials who are taking the steps necessary to protect people, both the protestors and the standers by, from unnecessary violence, while maintaining each person’s civil rights. We have seen past protests erupt into violence and it is likely that any large movement of people will have less scrupulous individuals who will not be satisfied in participating in a peaceful democratic protest.

It seems that the outrage expressed by CAN is, therefore, unfounded. The military is only doing what is necessary to complete activities required of it to operate constitutionally. The problems you have with recruitment policy are a more valid concern that should be advocated. CAN’s attempts to publicize military surveillance of anti-war activities are a foolhardy and disingenuous attempt to fight the administration’s activities.

Anti-Capitalists or Confused, Impotent Undergrads?

The Targum article from 22 November entitled, “Opponents of capitalism congregate on campus,” tends to lend some legitimacy to the gang of misfits calling themselves, erroneously, anti-capitalists. The amusing portion of the article is where the group attempts to talk about its ideas as being “just the culmination of all other human invention and ideas.” No the redundancy is not a mistake on my part; they actually are that inadequate at articulating any sort of ideology behind their movement.

This failure seems to be somewhat broad for opponents of Capitalism, they often can cite the fact that they don’t like it, but it is much rarer to actually hear a concrete reason behind it or any realistic solution; we’ve seen communism and I think we’ve had enough for the time being, on to the next.

The most embarrassing segment of this boondoggle, for Rutgers students as a whole, is the complete misunderstanding of Capitalism that the students seem to demonstrate through their plans help out in the community. They list some aspects of charity as their possible initiatives. Charity is not in itself anti-capitalist. Actually, it generally lends to the success of capitalist societies because it keeps any underclass living in a condition that is acceptable enough to not give incentive for rebellion. Additionally, charity does nothing to prevent the large accumulations of capital resources that are integral to a system of capitalism.

The free note swapping system advocated simply provides the means for less motivated students to slip through the cracks with passing grades, the fact that they are making it cheaper than the companies who sell notes is really irrelevant, it only means that people will have an equal opportunity and cost to be lazy. If a competitive and motivation driven education system is part of their idea of Capitalism, then I think that we should all get behind that portion of the ideology. On the other hand, if it is not, then I am not sure why an anti-capitalist group would even concern itself with such a base service. Finally, the businesses who sell notes at universities actually use very little capital; they simply provide a service, however destructive, at the market price on a fairly limited scale. This project itself demonstrates that this group is made up of frustrated students who have no understanding of the world around them. What they need is an economics textbook rather than an “Anti-Capitalist” group.

The book swap idea proves this notion further. At this point, the students are simply transferring something of value for something else of value. It is essentially reinstating a barter system. However, the Capitalist system is not built upon the notion of money. It simply uses money to make the system more efficient. The book swap idea is not repugnant to Capitalism by any means. If the market finds a way around a large corporation, in a way that is more efficient, then that is not an example of the breakdown of capitalism. Since students still pay each other, and the books are still produced by corporations, the students are essentially just cutting out unneeded middlemen. Book swapping is not anti-capitalist therefore, it may just be a more efficient way of getting resources to the students who need them.

The article goes on to suggest that simply removing money from transactions makes something non-capitalist or even anti-capitalist. Money has nothing to do with what makes a system capitalistic. If I trade you potatoes for a machine that can produce a lot of fabric and then hire someone (paid with carrots for instance) to run it for me, I am a capitalist. Money is only a unit of exchange and as such removing it will slow down the flow of resources, but will not systemically alter capitalism. This final blow to the Rutgers anti-capitalist movement only proves that not only can they not express any clear ideology, it is likely that they do not have one. Furthermore, they cannot even advocate innitiatives that would significantly alter our conception of functioning of capitalism.