Category Archives: Libertarianism

Over the weekend my Morning Readings included a lesson that economists teach called the Cobra Effect. Jon Miltimore is the Managing Editor of the Foundation for Economic Education in Atlanta and his FEE.org is a highly respected conservative libertarian economic think tank. In his story you are about to read, he claims economists around the world speak often on The Cobra Effect.

You see, every human decision brings about consequences, intended ones and unintended ones, Jon writes. Unintended consequences are so common economists often call them Cobra Problems, after an interesting historical event in India that occurred when the British Empire tried to eradicate cobras, the deadly snakes, by putting out a bounty on them. (the unintended consequences won that one!)

In two weeks we are told CHI Memorial Hospital will fire any employee who has not been vaccinated with the COVID shots.

Yet if you feel we have mandate problems, read what Mr. Miltimore writes about Houston:

* * *

COMMENTARY: MASSIVE NURSES SHORTAGE HITS HOUSTON, WEEKS AFTER 150 UNVACCINATED NURSES AND HOSPITAL WORKERS WERE FIRED

by Jon Miltimore, writing on August 23, 2021

Jennifer Bridges knew what was coming when her director at Houston Methodist hospital called her up in June to inquire about her vaccination status. Bridges, a 39-year-old registered nurse, responded absolutely not when asked if she was vaccinated or had made an effort to get vaccinated. She was terminated on the spot.

We all knew we were getting fired, Bridges, 39, told CBS News. We knew unless we took that shot to come back, we were getting fired today. There was no ifs, ands or buts. Bridges was one of more than 150 hospital workers fired by Houston Methodist hospital.

All last year, through the COVID pandemic, we came to work and did our jobs, said Kara Shepherd, a labor and delivery nurse who joined Bridges and other workers in an unsuccessful lawsuit. We did what we were asked. This year, were basically told were disposable.

PLEASE SEND HELP NOW

Shepherd and her colleagues may be disposable in the eyes of hospital administrators, but they are perhaps not as easily replaced as she or Houston Methodist thought.

Two months after firing unvaccinated hospital staff, Houston Methodist is one of several area hospitals experiencing a severe shortage of medical personnel. Media reports say hospitals have reached a breaking point because of a flood of COVID-19 cases.

In an editorial published Tuesday, the Houston Chronicle said the 25-county hospital area that includes Houston had more patients in hospital bedsmore than 2,700than at any point in 2021. News reports make it clear that hospitals are struggling to keep up.

KHOU-11, a local news station, says medical tents have been erected outside of Lyndon B. Johnson Hospital but are vacant because of a shortage of nurses.

Please send help now, said Dr. George Williams, chief ICU medical officer for LBJ Hospital.

While most media reports focus on LBJ Hospital, reports also make it clear other hospitals, including Houston Methodist, are experiencing similar struggles. The Houston Chronicle says Harris Health System (which includes LBJ) is short some 250 nurses, while the University of Texas Medical Branch has requested an additional one hundred nurses to help address staff shortages at four hospitals.

Baylor St. Lukes Medical Center, a private Houston hospital jointly owned by Baylor College and a local healthcare system, said the hospital is definitely being impacted by the nurse shortage.

As for Houston Methodist, the hospital is reportedly struggling as wellalthough theyve yet to admit it publicly.

An internal memo at Houston Methodist Hospital said it is struggling with staffing as the numbers of our COVID-19 patients rise, the Chronicle reports.

Public officials are scrambling to address the shortage, which has created a massive patient backlog throughout the Houston area. More than a week ago, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott requested out of state assistance for the statewide crisis, including 2,500 out of state nurses. LBJ Hospital officials said those nurses have not yet arrived.

The metro-wide shortage of nurses reportedly came to light when an ER doctor emailed a state senator about the dire situation in hospitals.

The combined increase in volume from (COVID and) existing normal volume (and) nursing shortage has made this a terrible disaster at every ER and hospital in the city of Houston, the physician wrote, according to the Chronicle.

THE COBRA EFFECTS

Its unclear to what extent Houston Methodists decision to fire 150 unvaccinated medical workers exacerbated the nursing crisis. For perhaps obvious reasons, hospital officials have been mum on the issue.

What we know is that Houston hospitals that did not abruptly fire 150 employees struggled to deal with the COVID spike, and in some cases people died as a result. So, its safe to presume that Houston Methodists decision to fire 150 employees a few weeks before the Delta variant arrived in force didnt make the situation any better and probably made it much worse.

Some may be tempted to think Houston Methodist was able to quickly replace the workers they lost, but evidence suggests this is unlikely. Apart from the broader shortage, front line nurses are burned out, they say.

We are all tired of this; nurses are tired of this, Texas Nurses Association CEO Cindy Zolnierek wrote in a recent public letter.

That Houston Methodist hospital didnt intend to exacerbate its shortage of hospital staff goes without saying, but its also an important reminder about what economists call the Cobra Effect.

Every human decision brings about consequences, intended ones and unintended ones. Unintended consequences are so common economists often call them Cobra Problems, after an interesting historical event in India that occurred when the British Empire tried to eradicate cobras by putting out a bounty on them. (Can you guess what happened?)

When hospital administrators set their policyget vaccinated or lose your jobtheir goal was to increase vaccination rates of hospital staff. The unintended consequence was a shortage of nurses and other hospital workers during a deadly pandemic.

In June, Houston Methodists president, Marc Boom, sounded confident that his coercive methods were effective, noting that almost 25,000 of the health systems 26,000 workers were fully vaccinated.

The science proves that the vaccines are not only safe but necessary if we are going to turn the corner against COVID-19, Boom told employees in a statement.

Other Houston hospitals saw things differently. Two months before Houston Methodist fired its workers, Harris Health System officials announced they would not be requiring hospital workers to get vaccinated, noting none of the vaccines were fully approved by the FDA.

Americans will, of course, disagree about which CEOs approach was the correct one. The pandemic, after all, has been bitterly divisive because were deeply divided over this very question: should coercive means be employed to achieve certain desired healthcare outcomes, and if so, to what extent?

In 2020, political leaders around the world said yes to this question, and the results were disastrous. A year later, private companies are playing a different version of the same game: take the vaccine or get fired.

Like the lockdown champions of 2020, corporate leaders no doubt believe their action is moral, proper, and will achieve their desired result. But as the Cobra Effect reminds us, focusing strictly on desired outcomes and ignoring potential unintended outcomes is a good way to get bitten.

* * *

The Foundation for Economic Education (FEE) is an American conservative libertarian economic think tank. It is a member of the State Policy Network. Its mission is to promote principles of "individual liberty, free-market economics, entrepreneurship, private property, high moral character, and limited government". Headquartered in Atlanta, it was established 75 years ago. It is considered the oldest free market think tank in the United States.

royexum@aol.com

More:
Roy Exum: Beware Of The Cobra - The Chattanoogan

Bernie Sanders wants better press coverage of the Build Back Better bill? Ask and you shall receive, Sanders. Matt Welch, Katherine Mangu-Ward, Peter Suderman, and Nick Gillespie detail the most egregious parts of this giant pile of potential spending. Plus we talk about the Jones Act, all on this Monday's Reason Roundtable.

Discussed in the show:

1:05: The Roundtable sets the record straight after the official White House Twitter account claimed the "Build Back Better Agenda is $0."

33:07: Weekly Listener Question: I am a Jones Act mariner. While I, and many other American merchant mariners, are pretty libertarian, the Jones Act is the third rail of the maritime industry and turns many mariners away from the libertarianmovement (Cato, Ronald Reagan, and John McCain are not popular among Jones Act Mariners). While I agree with many reforms, like removing the U.S. shipbuilding requirement for Jones Act (that is, domestic) trade, I do not agree with removing the cabotage rules for domestic trade. Airlines, trucking, and trains all enjoy cabotage protections for domestic trade, but it seems that the sights are always on the Jones Act unfairly and the American Merchant Marine. What say you?

39:03: William Shatner went to space!

44:20: Media recommendations for the week.

This week's links:

Send your questions to roundtable@reason.com. Be sure to include your social media handle and the correct pronunciation of your name.

Today's sponsors:

Audio production by Ian KeyserAssistant production by Regan TaylorMusic: "Angeline," by The Brothers Steve

Read this article:
The Biden White House Is Lying About the Democrats' Spending Bill - Reason

MANCHESTER, NJ The 2021 general election is near. Here's a look at your options for voting this year, along with who's on the ballot in Manchester.

In Ocean County that includes voting at a polling location, either during the early voting period or on Nov. 2.

If you're among the 54,000 voters in Ocean County who received vote-by-mail ballots they were sent to anyone who voted by mail in 2016, 2017, 2018 or 2019 you can turn in your ballot at a secure drop box, mail your ballot back or hand-deliver it to your local board of elections. If you mail it back, it must be postmarked by Nov. 2.

There are about 400,000 voters in Ocean County, and the majority will be voting in person. Sample ballots for those voting in person were expected to go out by Oct. 20. They are available online on the Ocean County Clerk's website.

Early voting begins Saturday, Oct. 23, and ends Oct. 31, and will be from 10 a.m. to 8 p.m. Mondays through Saturdays and 10 a.m. to 6 p.m. on Sundays.

LOCAL RACES

Ocean County Commissioners: There are two seats up for election. Voters have seven candidates to choose from: Gary Quinn and Bobbi Jo Crea, Republicans; Philip Nufrio and Catherine Paura, Democrats; Dan Valentine and Rob Canfield, Libertarian Party; and Barry Bender, Green Party.

Manchester Township municipal races: There are elections for mayor and council this year, both for one-year unfinished terms. Robert Hudak and Robert Arace are seeking the one-year unfinished mayoral term, and Michele Zolezi and Joseph Hankins are seeking the one-year unfinished term on the township council

Manchester Township voters also are being asked to choose two members for the Board of Education. The candidates are George J. Cervenak III, Sasiya O.Omilanowicz, Mike Kelliher, and Nicole Sahlin.

Those looking for a drop box for vote-by-mail ballots can use any in Ocean County. There are drop boxes at the Brick Township Municipal Building at 401 Chambers Bridge Road. The box is located at the rear of the building near the police department entrance and is under surveillance 24/7.

The vote-by-mail ballots will be picked up daily and brought to the Board of Elections. All security measures will be followed when collecting and transporting the vote-by-mail ballots, officials said.

Voters wondering how their signatures are checked before the upcoming election can see the process for themselves.

NOTE: This article has been updated to correct that early voting begins Saturday.

Read the original here:
2021 Election In Manchester: How To Vote, Whos On The Ballot - Patch.com

During bitcoins parabolic price increase this year, Twitter profiles with laser eyes suddenly emerged. Anons and celebrities, such as Elon Musk, added red lasers rays to their portraits and the hashtag #LaserRayUntil100k started to trend. As the hashtag indicated, the laser eyes were added as part of an internet ritual to increase bitcoins price to $100,000. But the laser eyes were only the latest expression of Bitcoins culture, which ranges from an idiosyncratic terminology (think HODL, number go up or nocoiner) to an emphasis on eating meat and lifting weights. Not surprisingly, critics cited the laser eyes as more evidence for Bitcoiners cult-like behavior.

But if we dismiss these cult-like rituals, we simply fail to understand their significance for Bitcoins adoption. Indeed, if we want to understand Bitcoin and its parabolic growth which, over 10 years, increased from zero to more than $1 trillion we have to recognize Bitcoins quasi-religious dimension, which reveals itself in the beliefs of some of the most committed supporters and their exegesis of Nakamotos code and writings.

Its the commitment and excessive enthusiasm of these developers and early adopters that have been driving Bitcoins development and adoption since its invention a decade ago. In other words, the evangelism of Bitcoin adopters which are often dismissed as believers, evangelists or cultists is an essential feature of Bitcoins technological diffusion.

Not just the online rituals of Bitcoiners but also Bitcoins genesis itself reveals a deep resemblance with religion. Similar to religion, Bitcoin has its own founding myth: it begins as an obscure and radically novel technology that was invented by a mysterious pseudonymous creator that has, later, completely disappeared.

One of the most salient features, of course, is the resemblance between Satoshi Nakamoto and religious leaders, such as Jesus Christ and his sacrifice for his belief. Whereas Christ died by crucifixion as a sacrifice to achieve atonement for sin, Nakamoto most likely sacrificed his estimated 1,148,800 bitcoin which never moved from the original wallet for his messianic, techno-libertarian vision of a decentralized alternative to fiat currencies and central banking.

Bitcoin itself the protocol with its hard-coded 21 million supply has, in turn, become a transcendent absolute beyond human control and manipulation that represents a universally valid and quasi-divine truth.

Similarly, the centrality of the white paper can be analogized to sacred scripture in religions. The mythologized absence of Nakamoto often referred to as Bitcoins immaculate conception has, in turn, stimulated competing exegeses of the white paper that aim to recover the true meaning of Nakamotos code and writings.

Over the past decade, incompatible interpretations of the white paper relating to technical features, such as block size limits, have triggered a series of so-called hard forks. Bitcoin Cash, for example, emerged in the summer of 2017 from developers disagreement about the block size and transaction throughput. The Bitcoin Cashfork bifurcated Bitcoin not only into two different protocols but also into splintered sects that are guided by different visions of Bitcoins future.

So-called Bitcoin maximalists, for example, envision bitcoin foremost as a form of digital gold, that is, a decentralized store of value. This view emphasizes bitcoin as a sound alternative to fiat currencies. Given bitcoins finite and asymptotic supply, supporters of this view which, because of its monetary network effects, consider bitcoin to be the only legitimate cryptocurrency believe that bitcoin represents a digital store of value. In contrast, proponents of Bitcoin forks, such as Bitcoin Cash, envisioned that Bitcoin will primarily facilitate individual small-value transactions.

Culturally, as a consequence of these bifurcating views of Bitcoin, different communities on Twitter, mailing lists and online forums have organized around conflicting interpretations of the white paper and original Bitcoin source code, which represent two of the most sacred objects of Bitcoin. Naturally, for some of the more radical believers in the original vision of Nakamoto, the creation of altcoins that is, cryptocurrencies that either directly copy Bitcoins source code or incorporate some of its technical or conceptual properties is, in Bitcoins eschatology, equalized to heresy. Not surprisingly, the heresy of attempting to clone Bitcoins immaculate conception requires some Bitcoin maximalists to excommunicate altcoins and their developers and supporters from Bitcoin-related forums, social media platforms and meetups.

As Bitcoin full-node operators choose which vision of Bitcoin they support by running the software that enforces the protocol rules, running nodes can be reinterpreted as one of the foundational ritual practices of Bitcoin. The ritual of running a Bitcoin node represents the social process that decides upon, implements and enforces a set of transaction and block-verification rules, which network participants can adopt. By adopting the same set of validation rules, network participants form an intersubjective consensus about what constitutes Bitcoin. Dissenting network participants which correspond to heretics can only deviate from this intersubjective definition of Bitcoin by hard forking the protocol. By upgrading a copied version of the Bitcoin software to a new set of transaction and block-verification rules, the protocol becomes compatible with their belief and interpretation of the white paper.

Analogous to religions, early disciples are critical in diffusing bleeding-edge technological innovations. For example, technology entrepreneur Wences Casares proselytized Nakamotos utopian prophecy among Silicon Valley venture capitalists. In the early stages of Bitcoin, a small group of die-hard believers, such as libertarian technologists and cypherpunks, started to experiment with the technology when it was still in its proof-of-concept phase. Early adopters then started to improve the Bitcoin software.

This extreme belief of early Bitcoin adopters, in turn, triggered the interest of early speculators and investors, which were, often, ideologically motivated to invest in the technology. It was this inflow of capital and interest that triggered the first Bitcoin bubbles in 2012 and 2013.

After the peak when bitcoin, for the first time, reached a price of more than $1,000 in November 2013 the bubble collapsed and interest decreased substantially. Eventually, bitcoins price bottomed and formed a plateau that attracted a new cohort of new believers and investors who appreciated the importance of the technology. Bitcoins price plateau persisted for two years before a new bubble gradually started to form in 2015. A new base of adopters has, over the prolonged bear market that lasted from 2013 to 2015, formed for the next iteration of the hype cycle. The next two bubbles, which, in 2017 and 2021, resulted in unprecedented hype and attention, attracted an even larger set of adopters.

These cycles of Bitcoin bubbles, which have given rise to accelerating prices and increasing media attention, have created a self-validating feedback loop that is continually reinforcing the belief and commitment of Bitcoin Core developers, entrepreneurs, or speculators.

Bitcoins history, which is punctuated by these fractally repeating and exponentially increasing series of bubbles and hype cycles, shows that the extreme commitment and quasi-religious belief in the technology have been critical for bootstrapping the network and cryptocurrency into existence.

Now, while the religious dimension of Bitcoin is fundamentally important in the process of technology adoption and diffusion, we obviously cant simply believe in Bitcoin for it to become successful. Money in a free market tends to converge on a single standard. In order for liquidity to gravitate to one cryptocurrency, its incentive design and protocol architecture must be vastly superior to any other competitor.

Bitcoin has objectively superior properties that are hard to replicate by altcoins. You can fork Bitcoin, but you cant copy, for example, its network effects, the long track record of network reliability, or the self-reinforcing reflexive feedback loops that drive Bitcoins price, liquidity and security.

But coupled with its technical properties, the extreme beliefs and commitments of core developers, HODLers and entrepreneurs have, over the last decade, boosted Bitcoins market cap from zero to more than $1 trillion, and the network from one user Satoshi Nakamoto himself to more than 16,000 nodes. After all, as the history of Christianity, for example, demonstrates, a group of committed believers can have quite an impact.

As investor Peter Thiel once remarked: The best startups might be considered slightly less extreme kinds of cults. The biggest difference is that cults tend to be fanatically wrong about something important. People at a successful startup are fanatically right about something those outside it have missed.

Its going to be interesting to witness what happens when more and more converts start to believe in the prophecy of Satoshi Nakamoto.

So far, the Bitcoin cult has been fanatically right.

Many thanks to Byrne Hobart and Michael Goldstein.

For a more detailed paper on the social dynamics of Bitcoin, see Tobias Huber and Didier Sornette, Boom, Bust, and Bitcoin: Bitcoin-Bubbles As Innovation Accelerators.

This is a guest post by Tobias Huber. Opinions expressed are entirely their own and do not necessarily reflect those of BTC Inc or Bitcoin Magazine.

See the original post here:
The Prophecy Of Satoshi Nakamoto: Bitcoin As Religion - Bitcoin Magazine

ELIZABETHTOWN A report released last week by a nonprofit Libertarian-based think tank offers true information on the American Rescue Plan Act, and yet leaves out some important facts.

The Reason Foundation researched 142 reports filed by states, cities and counties and declared state and local governments have spent very little of the federal aid they allocated under the American Rescue Plan Act. On its website, Reason goes on to knock the Biden administration and lawmakers who cited urgency in passing $350 billion in emergency funding for state, local, and territorial governments.

Bladen County commissioners have a share of that money, and have recently been in discussions for appropriation. But there isnt necessarily a hurry.

County Manager Greg Martin, responding to questions from the Bladen Journal, wrote in an email, The deadline for obligating funds is December 2024 and deadline for spending funds is December 2026. The Board recently held a public hearing and received requests for funds. US Treasury has not released Final Rule regarding eligible uses of funds. The School of Government advises local governments to plan but wait for final rule. We will plan to determine uses of funds in the near future.

Bladen County was allocated $6,355,865 and thus far has received one-half, or $3,177,932.50. Martin said the county has used only $30,777.40 thus far, all for the purpose of COVID-19 sick leave.

These funds are not to be confused with prior relief funds for COVID-19, some of which came during the Trump administration.

Martin wrote in the email, Bladen County received $1,417,464.82 in Coronavirus Relief Funds. To date, $1,390,838.75 has been spent. The unspent funding of $26,626.07 is due to items ordered by the Town of White Lake being on back order. Funds are to be spent by December 31, 2021.

The Reason Foundations report trumpets that 97 percent of the funds the Biden administration was in a hurry to get and disperse have not been spent. It cited, for reasons the money has gone unspent, state and local governments seeing very minimal dips in 2020 revenue, and strings attached to the ARPA funds restricting how they can be spent.

The John Locke Foundation, a conservative-leaning think tank in Raleigh, recently documented nearly 90 percent of the $6 billion in COVID-19 relief funds sent to the state being unspent as of mid-July. At less than 2 percent unspent, Bladen County significantly bucks that trend.

This story authored by Alan Wooten of the Bladen Journal. Contact him at 910-247-9132 or awooten@bladenjournal.com.

Go here to see the original:
ARPA funding slow to go out, and in Bladen County theres a reasonable explanation for that - Elizabethtown Bladen Journal

(Disclosure: Im working on a podcast about the show Succession for HBO, which has aired programming featuring Dwayne The Rock Johnson and Andr the Giant.)

This week I spoke with Max Chafkin, an editor at Bloomberg Businessweek and the author of a new biography of the tech mogul Peter Thiel called The Contrarian: Peter Thiel and Silicon Valleys Pursuit of Power.

1. Why did you pick Peter Thiel as a subject, and what do you think he represents in Silicon Valley?

There are other figures you could tell the story of Silicon Valleys rise through Jeff Bezos, Elon Musk, Mark Zuckerberg and so on. But Thiel seemed interesting for two reasons: First, hes full of contradictions. How, for instance, does a gay, immigrant technologist with two Stanford degrees come to enthusiastically support a reactionary nativist like Donald Trump? Second, while those other tech moguls have had a direct influence through their companies, Thiels influence has been more subtle and, Id argue, more profound. Silicon Valley is as much an idea as a place at this point, and I think Thiels ideology, which combines nationalist and libertarian (Liberthielien?) politics with a view that tech founders should rule the world, has shaped that idea more than anyone else. Silicon Valleys liberals like to distance themselves from Thiel politically, but when you get down to it, they tend to agree with him on most things.

2. What do people get wrong about him, and what do you think does not get enough attention?

Thiel is not the Randian superhero his tech-bro followers imagine; hes also not the vampiric right-wing villain imagined by the left. Hes gotten a lot of things right, but hes made mistakes in his career, which I think contain lessons for both his fans and his critics. At times, he has allowed himself to be blinded by his biases an interesting problem for someone who has been keen to call out biases of his critics. As I report in the book, Thiels climate change denialism caused him to miss a chance to invest in Tesla early, and his need to have a contrarian take caused him to run his hedge fund into the ground during the 2008 financial crisis. Often the consensus view is the correct one.

3. I think Thiel, who is on Facebooks board, is one of the biggest influences on Mark Zuckerberg and not in a positive way. Please discuss.

I agree completely his influence on Zuckerberg has been enormous. First, hes pushed Zuckerberg toward a libertarian worldview, which I think has caused Facebook to take a hands-off position on misinformation and violence. Personally though, Im less worried about Thiels politics than I am about the influence hes had on Zuckerbergs approach as C.E.O. The Thiel business philosophy says that founders should have absolute power and should pursue monopolistic growth at all costs breaking rules and norms whenever possible. Its pretty clear that this mind-set allowed Facebook to become dominant, but it also made Facebook indifferent to its responsibilities to society. A tiny start-up that subscribes to the Thiel playbook is no big deal; a trillion-dollar media conglomerate with endless data on three billion people that is operating according to that playbook is scary.

Original post:
Opinion | How Tweeting Can Be Like Pro Wrestling, and Other Observations - The New York Times

American political philosopher (1938-2002)

Robert Nozick

Nozick in 1977

Main interests

Notable ideas

Robert Nozick (; November 16, 1938 January 23, 2002) was an American philosopher. He held the Joseph Pellegrino University Professorship at Harvard University,[3] and was president of the American Philosophical Association. He is best known for his books Philosophical Explanations (1981), which included his counterfactual theory of knowledge, and Anarchy, State, and Utopia (1974), a libertarian answer to John Rawls' A Theory of Justice (1971), in which Nozick also presented his own theory of utopia as one in which people can freely choose the rules of the society they enter into. His other work involved ethics, decision theory, philosophy of mind, metaphysics and epistemology. His final work before his death, Invariances (2001), introduced his theory of evolutionary cosmology, by which he argues invariances, and hence objectivity itself, emerged through evolution across possible worlds.[4]

Nozick was born in Brooklyn to a family of Jewish descent. His mother was born Sophie Cohen, and his father was a Jew from a Russian shtetl who had been born with the name Cohen and who ran a small business.[5]

Nozick attended the public schools in Brooklyn. He was then educated at Columbia University (A.B. 1959, summa cum laude), where he studied with Sidney Morgenbesser, and later at Princeton University (Ph.D. 1963) under Carl Hempel, and at Oxford University as a Fulbright Scholar (19631964). At one point he joined the youth branch of Norman Thomas's Socialist Party. In addition, at Columbia he founded the local chapter of the Student League for Industrial Democracy which in 1960 changed its name to Students for a Democratic Society.

That same year, after receiving his Bachelor of Arts degree in 1959, he married Barbara Fierer. They had two children, Emily and David. The Nozicks eventually divorced and he remarried, to the poet Gjertrud Schnackenberg. Nozick died in 2002 after a prolonged struggle with stomach cancer.[6] He was interred at Mount Auburn Cemetery in Cambridge, Massachusetts.

For Anarchy, State, and Utopia (1974) Nozick received a National Book Award in the category Philosophy and Religion.[7]There, Nozick argues that only a minimal state limited to the narrow functions of protection against "force, fraud, theft, and administering courts of law"[8] could be justified, as any more extensive state would violate people's rights. For Nozick, a distribution of goods is just if brought about by free exchange among consenting adults from a just starting position, even if large inequalities subsequently emerge from the process.

Nozick challenged the partial conclusion of John Rawls's Second Principle of Justice of his A Theory of Justice, that "social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are to be of greatest benefit to the least-advantaged members of society." Anarchy, State, and Utopia claims a heritage from John Locke's Second Treatise on Government and seeks to ground itself upon a natural law doctrine, but reaches some importantly different conclusions from Locke himself in several ways. Nozick appealed also to the Kantian idea that people should be treated as end in themselves (what he termed 'separatedness of persons'), not merely as a means to an end.

Most controversially, and unlike Locke and Kant, Nozick argued that consistent application of self-ownership and non-aggression principle[9] would allow and regard as valid consensual or non-coercive enslavement contracts between adults. He rejected the notion of inalienable rights advanced by Locke and most contemporary capitalist-oriented libertarian academics, writing in Anarchy, State, and Utopia that the typical notion of a "free system" would allow adults to voluntarily enter into non-coercive slave contracts.[10][11][12][13][14][15][16]

In Philosophical Explanations (1981), which received the Phi Beta Kappa Society's Ralph Waldo Emerson Award, Nozick provided novel accounts of knowledge, free will, personal identity, the nature of value, and the meaning of life. He also put forward an epistemological system which attempted to deal with both the Gettier problem and those posed by skepticism. This highly influential argument eschewed justification as a necessary requirement for knowledge.[17]:ch. 7

Nozick's four conditions for S's knowing that P were (S=Subject / P=Proposition):

Nozick's third and fourth conditions are counterfactuals. He called this the "tracking theory" of knowledge. Nozick believed the counterfactual conditionals bring out an important aspect of our intuitive grasp of knowledge: For any given fact, the believer's method must reliably track the truth despite varying relevant conditions. In this way, Nozick's theory is similar to reliabilism. Due to certain counterexamples that could otherwise be raised against these counterfactual conditions, Nozick specified that:

Where M stands for the method by which n came to arrive at a belief whether or not P.

A major criticism of Nozick's theory of knowledge is his rejection of the principle of deductive closure. This principle states that if S knows X and S knows that X implies Y, then S knows Y. Nozick's truth tracking conditions do not allow for the principle of deductive closure. Nozick believes that the truth tracking conditions are more fundamental to human intuition than the principle of deductive closure.[citation needed]

The Examined Life (1989), pitched to a broader public, explores love, death, faith, reality, and the meaning of life. According to Stephen Metcalf, Nozick expresses serious misgivings about capitalist libertarianism, going so far as to reject much of the foundations of the theory on the grounds that personal freedom can sometimes only be fully actualized via a collectivist politics and that wealth is at times justly redistributed via taxation to protect the freedom of the many from the potential tyranny of an overly selfish and powerful few.[19] Nozick suggests that citizens who are opposed to wealth redistribution which fund programs they object to, should be able to opt out by supporting alternative government approved charities with an added 5% surcharge.[20]

However, Jeff Riggenbach has noted that in an interview conducted in July 2001, he stated that he had never stopped self-identifying as a libertarian. Roderick Long reported that in his last book, Invariances, "[Nozick] identified voluntary cooperation as the 'core principle' of ethics, maintaining that the duty not to interfere with another person's 'domain of choice' is '[a]ll that any society should (coercively) demand'; higher levels of ethics, involving positive benevolence, represent instead a 'personal ideal' that should be left to 'a person's own individual choice and development.' And that certainly sounds like an attempt to embrace libertarianism all over again. My own view is that Nozick's thinking about these matters evolved over time and that what he wrote at any given time was an accurate reflection of what he was thinking at that time."[21] Furthermore, Julian Sanchez reported that "Nozick always thought of himself as a libertarian in a broad sense, right up to his final days, even as his views became somewhat less 'hardcore.'"[22]

The Nature of Rationality (1993) presents a theory of practical reason that attempts to embellish notoriously spartan classical decision theory.

Socratic Puzzles (1997) is a collection of papers that range in topic from Ayn Rand and Austrian economics to animal rights. A thesis claims that "social ties are deeply interconnected with vital parts of Nozick's later philosophy", citing these two works as a development of The Examined Life.[23]

His last production, Invariances (2001), applies insights from physics and biology to questions of objectivity in such areas as the nature of necessity and moral value.

Nozick created the thought experiment of the "utility monster" to show that average utilitarianism could lead to a situation where the needs of the vast majority were sacrificed for one individual. He also wrote a version of what was essentially a previously-known thought experiment, the experience machine, in an attempt to show that ethical hedonism was false. Nozick asked us to imagine that "superduper neuropsychologists" have figured out a way to stimulate a person's brain to induce pleasurable experiences.[17]:21011 We would not be able to tell that these experiences were not real. He asks us, if we were given the choice, would we choose a machine-induced experience of a wonderful life over real life? Nozick says no, then asks whether we have reasons not to plug into the machine and concludes that since we desire to be really impressed by things and not just feel something pleasurable, it does not seem to be rational to plug in, ethical hedonism must be false.

Nozick was notable for the exploratory style of his philosophizing and for his methodological ecumenism. Often content to raise tantalizing philosophical possibilities and then leave judgment to the reader, Nozick was also notable for drawing from literature outside of philosophy (e.g., economics, physics, evolutionary biology).[24]

In his 2001 work, Invariances, Nozick introduces his theory of truth, in which he leans towards a deflationary theory of truth, but argues that objectivity arises through being invariant under various transformations. For instance, space-time is a significant objective fact because an interval involving both temporal and spatial separation is invariant, whereas no simpler interval involving only temporal or only spatial separation is invariant under Lorentz transformations. Nozick argues that invariances, and hence objectivity itself, emerged through a theory of evolutionary cosmology across possible worlds.[25]

Read the original:
Robert Nozick - Wikipedia

WALL, NJ This year's general election will take place on Nov. 2, and voters in Wall Township have the option of casting their ballot either by mail using a secure dropbox, hand-delivering it to your local board of elections, or voting at your local polling location.

This year, voters can also vote early at in-person voting at select locations starting Saturday, Oct. 23 through Sunday, Oct. 31 from 10 a.m. to 8 p.m. Monday through Saturday, and 10 a.m. to 6 p.m. on Sunday.

Must-Know Election Info

Election date: Nov. 2

Check if you are registered to vote.

Where can I vote in person?

Mail-in ballot postmarked by deadline: Nov. 2

Mail-in ballot received by deadline: Nov. 8

What Will You See On Your Ballot?

On the state side of things, there is a gubernatorial race this year, with current governor Phil Murphy being challenged by Republican Jack Ciattarelli, Libertarian Gregg Mele, Joanne Kuniansky of the Socialist Workers Party, and Madelyn Hoffman, who is representing the Green Party.

For Lt. Governor, incumbent Shelia Oliver is facing opposition from Diane Allen of the Republican Party, Eveline Brownstein of the Libertarian Party, Vivian Sahner of the Socialist Workers Party, and Heather Warburton of the Green Party.

There will also be both a State Senate and State Assembly race on this year's ballot. Wall Township is in legislative district 30, which sees incumbent Assemblymen Sean Kean and Edward "Ned" Thompson facing Democratic challengers Matthew Filosa and Stephen Dobbins while current state senator Rober Singer will be running against Democrat Dan Stinger.

As far as municipal elections go, Wall Township's mayor Timothy Farrell is running unopposed only and only current Board of Education member Adam Nasr is running for the three openings on the board.

There are also two statewide ballot questions: one is for the permitting of betting on all college teams at casinos and sportsbooks in the state. Currently, you are not allowed to bet on a New Jersey college sports team.

The other question is for the permitting of all groups to used the net proceeds from bingos or raffles to benefit their group. At the moment, only veterans and senior citizen groups can profit off of bingos and raffles.

Election Day is Nov. 2 and keep reading Patch for all of your Election 2021 updates.

The rest is here:
Election 21: When, Where & How To Vote In Wall Township - Patch.com

Troy, Mo. - Becky Martin is looking to bring something different to Lincoln County.

The local mother of two announced her candidacy as the Libertarian opponent for District 41 Representative during a rally at Fairgrounds Park Pavilion on Oct. 9.

Martin is the second candidate to enter the race to fill to replace Randy Pietzman, who is retiring due to term limits. Former Winfield Mayor Ryan Ruckel has announced has candidacy as a Republican.

However, Martin said she is entering the race with a different approach. Martin identifies as a fiscally conservative, pro-life, pro-gun, Christian, homeschoolingLibertarian who believes in individual freedom, government accountability, school choice, reduced taxes, private property rights and, in keeping government out of our healthcare.

She said she believes Lincoln County is tired of the same politics and politicians heading to Jefferson City, and she thinks the people are ready for a third-party option.

The fact I am not a career politician helps, she said. I dont have my own personal political agenda.

Im here to fight for my neighbors.

Martin also said she made her decision to run by talking with other lawmakers and working as an advocate for her friends and neighbors, but also seeing the problems Lincoln County has.

She said she admires the work Pietzman has done in office, but said there is a lot of work to be done, especially with crime in the county.

Ive already got people involved (in my campaign), Martin said. Ive already seen people frustrated with how our judicial system has worked here (in Lincoln County).

Martin said she wants to get voters more involved in how their own local governments work, so she created a guide of political subdivisions in the county so every voter can find out where they live and who represents them.

Read the original here:
Martin wants to bring alternative voice to Lincoln County - lincolnnewsnow.com

Jamie Lee Curtis in Halloween Kills(Universal Pictures)

Halloween Kills offers too much violence and virtually no wit.

I know I sound like Im writing speeding tickets at the Indy 500, but Halloween Kills is too violent. I should clarify that Im a fan of sickmovie violence and often find it hilarious. But, sheesh, did they have to ram a fluorescent light bulb through the throat of that nice old black lady? Yuck.

To be enjoyable, movie violence has to have a point: Its cathartic (bad guy gets what he deserves), its ironic, its so absurd that its funny. In the slasher movies of the Seventies, the gore was easy to take because it was both unreal (the color of the blood was always off) and it was in a sense justified. We never cared about the dumb-bunny victims, who existed only to be slaughtered. They were targets, not human beings. Anyway, most of them were so silly and obtuse they deserved it. The link between sex and death in teen-facing movies make out and get taken out was less a moralizing warning about the dangers of copulation than it was a simple exploitation of the way that sex and terror jostle for space in the same forbidden, shadowy corner of our lizard brains. The violence didnt hurt, it simply got the audience excited. That was the purpose of horror: not to scare per se, but to create a thrilling simulacrum of scariness. Genuinely scary movies (say, Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer or Funny Games) are not fun.

In Halloween Kills, though, which is streaming on Peacock as well as being shown in theaters, the only element that excites more than it nauseates is the terrific score, a beefed-up version of John Carpenters creepily minimalist music for the first movie, in this iteration credited to Carpenter, his son Cody, and to Daniel Davies. Picking up immediately after the brilliant 2018 Halloween (which was not a remake but a sequel to the 1978 Halloween that ignored all intervening movies), the new one is grueling, enervating, and dispiriting. The director, David Gordon Green, who co-wrote the script with his frequent collaborator Danny McBride and Scott Teems, has such a distinguished career in comedy that I was shocked to see him abandoning his sense of humor. Satirical and wry as the 2018 movie was, with a pleasing right-wing tilt, this one is just a harrowing splatter circus. Green takes pains to get us comfortable with a diverse array of characters a nice black couple, a nice gay couple, an interracial pair of oldsters only to dispatch them in bursts of ruthless gore, without a hint of wit. Taking pains to make everybody likable and then feeding them through the Michael Meyers shredder borders on the sadistic. I expected more subtlety from a talent on Greens level.

Making things worse, there are two political allegories in Halloween Kills that dont make much sense. First, theres a spoof of libertarianism embodied by 1980s actor Anthony Michael Hall, now beefy and middle-aged. He plays a survivor of the 1978 events (which Green expands upon in a pointless series of flashbacks starring Thomas Mann as the young cop played by Will Patton today) who starts a citizens vigilante movement based upon empty sloganeering (Evil dies tonight!) and a belief that the police department has failed the citizens of Haddonfield, Ill. His mob movement leads to catastrophe, not that the police exactly distinguish themselves either, so regardless of what the movie indicates you should think, Ill call it a draw between individualism and deference to the state. Theres a system! complains Judy Greers Karen, the voice of navete in the film, who suggests citizens step back and trust their betters in government. Her more practical mother, Laurie Strode (Jamie Lee Curtis), corrects her: Well, the system failed. Point to the libertarian side.

Later in the movie, theres an even less convincing glop of social commentary. Laurie, who wakes up wounded in a hospital bed believing mistakenly that she and her daughter and granddaughter Allyson (Andi Matichak) have successfully killed Michael Myers by trapping him in a fire, offers a solemn analysis of the greater meaning of the killer. By attempting to destroy him, the villagers have made him stronger, and he has even transmuted (the script says transcended) into an abstract concept: Fear. As a moral to the story, this comes as a head-scratcher. Although the mob whipped up in the movie is indeed dangerous, it isnt nearly as lethal as Michael. Quick trivia question: How many people did the Captain Kirk-masked Michael kill in the original movie? Onscreen, only four. Michael kills dozens in this one, so many that its hard to count them all, and as Laurie says, he no longer seems mortal. So despite 40 years of fighting Michael, she seems to be missing the point when she says fear is the real problem in Haddonfield because fear is dividing us. Id say no, its really the guy on the insane murder rampage thats the problem, and that fear of his evil deeds is extremely well justified.

If you valued reading this article, please consider joining our fight by donating to our Fall Webathon. Your contribution makes it possible for us to continueour mission of speaking truth and defending conservative principles.

Visit link:
Sick, but Not in a Good Way - National Review