Dwarvia - The Darkness

It was a bright summer morning when it arrived. Coast dwellers say it came from the east like a storm cloud and grew higher, faster, and darker before it washed over the shoreline and then drifted over the mainland, blanketing all of Dwarvia. It wasn't a cloud, it wasn't dust, but a strange dry haze that hung in the air like cigar smoke. It was orderless and invisible at short distances, but from the mountains and hillsides the fields and prairies disappeared into darkness in all directions, and the sun became a dim white saucer floating through the soupy sky.

Sicko

I watched Sicko last night at Ryan's place. In the past I have recoiled in horror at the presumptuous and slanted nature of Mr. Moore's documentaries. Apparently, when faced with the sick and dying even the callous Mr. Moore has enough conscience to respect facts and correctly identify the proper victims. I think he may have even touched on some of the real causes here. Most importantly, I think this time he stumbled on a real problem that needs little sensationalism to demonstrate.

The most important thing I got out of this was the realization that our health care system is already socialized. And as such, Medicare and the prescription drug plan already suffer from the inevitable disastrous effects - government cooperation with corporations who suffer the irresistible temptation to screw the public for their own benefit.

This is an interesting situation. Our country was founded on the principle that we have a "right to life." If Mr. Moore isn't fibbing, our (socialized) system has actually withheld treatment resulting in death. I was terrified to see this. But, to what degree do we cooperate in order to make sure this never happens? Do we ban cigarettes because they sometimes cause death?

It's really all about risk. Do we allow people to take heavy risks in return for financial prosperity? That is, do we allow people to not pay for health coverage? If so, it seems to me we would be obligated to let the uninsured die and assume that is what they wanted. (The alternative requires taking money out of the pockets of the responsible folks anyway). Since we usually assume people do not want to die, it seems to me the rest of us are going to pick up the slack no matter what. So, maybe we should bite the bullet here and all agree not to kill each other after all.

Sing

It's amazing how the cells in our bodies replace themselves. Like skin. It replaces itself every few months or so. Not sure about brain cells. Nonetheless I think there is ample evidence to suggest that a brain is capable of rewiring itself - either willfully or through encouragement.

For example, completely restrained, balls situated within a machine vise, lever moved a quarter turn for each time I refused to rebuke the former statement, there is a strong possibility I could be completely convinced my brain was not capable of rewiring itself.

Quiet

I smell quiet. It smells like ticking, a laptop hard drive, cat breath, a bus; voices in my head.

Busy these days. Penelope Press got it's second gig - a contract technical writing project (yes, about Finale again). So, little time for else at the moment.

Bullshit

Cheers. It's time for a ramble, so here we go. Bullshit. That's what this one's about. Whenever you listen to anyone, whenever you hear the radio, or go to a city council meeting, remember to repeat it to yourself. "Bullshit, bullshit, bullshit." Then, when you can settle down and have some time to think about it all, you can carefully extract the tiny shred of non-bullshit from the remainder of the steaming pile.

There are some exceptions to the rule. When someone beats the crap out of you, and you are a bloody mess is some ally, that is not bullshit. If you spend an evening next to a barstool adorned with a voracious mass of sobbing flesh, that is not bullshit. When you hear a great song, not bullshit. A great story, poem, movie, or blog - also not bullshit.

We all have bullshit detectors. Mine turns on after about two beers (at least I think it does). Sometimes I even detect myself - that means it's time for a third. Maybe that's why I love beer so much. No one can be an intentional nefarious liar after a few beers. There's a rule for y'alls - never trust anyone who doesn't drink - they probably have a corpse in their trunk.

But really. If you are a serial killer, do you really risk getting wasted with your buddies? Is that really a smart move? Probably not. If you are wanted in 48 states, do you really throw a 20 kegger open house. So there it is...Beer , the great equalizer. Come to my house and equalize with me. It will be fun. And not bullshit. Vagabonds, baristas, heads of state welcome. Music, poetry, friends, humans were built for this. Swing over, search my house for corpses, then drown yourselves in sweet malt beverages. What? Are you hiding corpses or something?

Come and bring your thirst - I'll be bumbing around till next Monday while the lady does her important business stuff in LA. Yes, I am somewhat jealous. I hear it is above zero degrees there. Yes, I have had enough beers to not care right now. But most importantly, no bullshit. Okay, that'll do it for now. Cheers!

Dwarvia

The Dunder Dwarves, like all in Dwarvia, drank only the delicious milk of the halisaur, which were large, winged reptilian creatures said to be a type of luck dragon. They didn't really know why, but no one in Dunder village had ever cared to drink anything else. There was little reason to. Every dwarf owned his own halisaur. In fact, by law each was given one at birth, and the town had been peaceful as long as anyone could remember. But legend tells us it wasn't always that way...

In an earlier age halisaurs were not so common. In fact, they were only owned by a single family of rich dwarves named the Drubens, who kept them locked in secret pastures guarded by menacing fear dragons that would soar above the towering pasture walls. At this time the milk from the halisaurs was sold to the dwarves; not just the ones from Dunder village, but the whole country of Dwarvia.

The Drubens had plenty of land, and sold their milk at a handsome price. But managing the halisaurs was a constant fiasco. It just so happens halisaurs are easily disgruntled when arranged into herds, and many bizarre accidents would plague the farm when the proportion of herders was too low. Workers would succumb to the most miraculous misfortunes including lightning strikes, ant invasions, spontaneous quicksand accidents and even miniature tornadoes. Because of this, the number of farm workers was never enough to properly tend to the necessary work. Few workers dared work for the Drubens.

Eventually, after an unfortunate dandelion incident, the Drubens decided they must raise wages to attract more workers. Deciding the pay was worth the risk, hundreds of new herders began tending to the pastures, and soon the disasters mellowed in frequency and severity. The perpetual mayhem was diminished to a dull roar of minor misfortunes.

But to compensate for the higher wages the Drubens had no choice but to raise the price of milk. But, the price required was so high that all of Dwarvia revolted. They organized an army, defeated the fear dragons, and released the entire hoard of halisaurs. The people of Dwarvia were surprised to find that there was precisely one halisaur for each dwarf, and each was delighted to provide milk for one master. And this is how every dwarf got their halisaur.

Then the halisaurs became more productive and all of Dwarvia celebrated with great festivals. Cheerful and well-mannered, many of the halisaurs began producing more milk than necessary - more than any one dwarf could drink. So, those with extra milk sold it for whatever price they could get. Some halisaurs produced more milk than others, so there was always some dwarf willing to buy another's extra.

As the years passed, the halisaur's cooperative nature became obvious. They were peaceful, docile creatures along side their master, and the dwarves became affectionate towards their halisaur, feeding and caring for it appropriately. There was a mysterious aura about them. For example, throughout Dwarvia, one halisaur was always born for every baby dwarf, and never more than one. This nature of the halisaur was never entirely understood, but it continued for so many years, that all dwarves knew they could count on a halisaur at birth or shortly after.

Caring for a halisaur is not always easy, and some dwarves were better suited for it than others. Many who became occupied with their farm, business or other endeavor left friends or family to care for theirs, which the halisaurs would tolerate begrudgingly. It was simply a fact of life that cheap and plentiful halisaur milk was always available, and generations of dwarves passed until this everyday part of their culture was almost an afterthought.

One day a Dwarf named Dwain was approached by a famished traveler from a distant part of Dwarvia. The visitor, who called himself Ruben, claimed to have lost his halisaur. Never had Dwain imagined one could possibly lose their own halisaur - it was unheard of. Ruben was invited to stay with Dwain, and was given milk and restored to health. Dwain and his wife Darla felt very sorry for poor Ruben, who cried and complained often about his loss. Ruben would often lament that he couldn't continue his journy home without a halisaur to accompany him. Finally, after much discussion, Dwain and Darla decided they would give one of their halisaurs to Ruben. Ruben at first rejected their offer, but Dwain and Darla finally assured Ruben they could share the milk from their remaining halisaur. Finally, Ruben accepted, and took Dwain's halisaur for the journey home. As a return gift, Dwain and Darla were given ten gold pieces for their generosity.

At first, Dwain and Darla were reprimanded by all in town. No one had ever abandoned their halisaur. But, when they explained that it was given to replace the one lost by a starving, destitute traveler, they were forgiven. Their punishment was sharing the milk from one dragon, which happened to be enough for them both anyway. But others in town heard that the traveler had paid ten gold pieces, which was quite a lot of money. Soon, another was rumored to sell his halisaur for an amazing one hundred gold pieces. Over the next several years, many sold their halisaurs, and most of them were sold to rich, but starving travelers who had claimed to have lost theirs.

Decades passed, and dwarves continued to sell their halisaurs until they were very rare in Dwarvia. It was discovered that Ruben had never lost his halisaur, but swindled it for the Druben family who had decided to go back into the business of herding halisaurs. By this time so many dwarves had been born, and therefore so many halisaurs, that great islands and even small continents were devoted to their management. And the Drubens changed their name to the Drabens, and they bought all the halisaurs they could and herded them on these islands. Despite effective new pacification methods the halisaur compounds were notorious for freakish accidents, and the price of milk again began to go up.

Eventually, the secluded Dunder village was the only place in Dwarvia that still contained any halisaurs. And this is where our story begins.

Ron Paul vs. the Libertarian Party

lib·er·tar·i·an n.

1. An advocate of the doctrine of free will.
2. a: a person who upholds the principles of individual liberty especially of thought and action b: a member of a political party advocating libertarian principles

I think most of us can agree that free will and individual liberty are pretty important - and was once taken very seriously in manuscripts like the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. The essentials are clear enough, but I suspect many Libertarians aren't really taking the necessary dose of their own medicine.

One main idea is that life, liberty, and happiness came first, and then governments were instituted by men to protect these things, or at least the freedom to pursue them according to one's ability. So, the question our founding fathers had to ask themselves was something like..."How do we protect the rights of every citizen from coercion without breaking our own rule?" Considering the tendency for civilizations to fall to tyranny, how do we protect every individual in future generations from:

• Autocracy
• Oligarchy
• Tyranny of the Majority
  

We call ourselves a democracy, but the founding fathers were terrified of a true direct democracy. In such a system, 51% could legally rule over the remaining 49%. And they knew that 80% of the electorate were blithering idiots anyway even if they did pay attention to what was going on. So we ended up with a Constitutional Republic, and use a democratic system to elect the representatives. And then there were the three branches, checks and balances, serving to protect the country from the droves of raving lunatics we were bound to elect. Yada yada. You know all this. But as we observe what they did, it's perhaps even more important to remember the reasons they did it.

They did it because throughout history civilizations always tend to fall to one sort of tyranny or another. The state always eventually exploits the people it was founded to protect for its own preservation, making it the cause of the problem rather than the solution. This is what all the founding fathers attempted to avoid. We see evidence of self-preservation tendencies today whenever government "steals from Peter to pay Paul" in order to secure Paul's support (earmarks, subsidies, etc.). Recently, it has also done things like wiretapping, and all that Big Brother stuff associated with the war on terror. These things all corrode individual liberties and consolidate power into the hands of the state. So, would the authors of the Constitution condone this behavior?

Most think the Constitution is great because it can be amended to fit a changing society. This may be true to some extent, but more importantly, its principles continue to persist after 230 years. These principles were true thousands of years ago and they will likely persist thousands of years from now. In a rapidly changing society, there is a temptation to believe that these principles can be sacrificed for the greater good - a fallacious argument repeated time and again by individuals or groups who would benefit from such a thing at the expense of everyone else.

The general consensus is still...Individual liberty = the common good. Since no one knows any one else's definition of happiness, every individual must be protected from coercion by others, and allowed to use their capabilities for their own benefit to the greatest degree possible though voluntary cooperation and mutually beneficial contract. All the states could somehow agree with this in the late 18th century, and as far as I know, it's still the law - on paper anyway. And since we have this freedom, we can choose how to spend it ourselves. We sacrifice liberty when we get a job, get married, or join a curling league. But the point is, we get to choose, not the government.

Anyway, the protection of one's intellectual and religious freedom was at the core of our system, and motivated by the principles of individual liberty - the same thing the Libertarian party is dedicated to. Is the Libertarian party subject to the same corrosive influences our founding fathers battled? Absolutely. How has the Libertarian party fared compared to the US government? Not so good.

Here's the problem. You need to respect everyone's right to express their ideas if you are a true libertarian, as long as they don't cause harm or silence others. Surprise! Some libertarians have really whacked-out views. In fact, those that cling to their right of expression despite constant and overwhelming popular opposition are most dependent on liberty - even while blithely rejecting its fundamentals themselves! Given the inclusive principles of liberty, it seems inevitable that the most abhorred outcasts at the fringes of society will call themselves Libertarians, then use any success of the party to trumpet their minority positions. It's the same thing lobbyists and special interests do to take advantage of the US government. It's the opposition to such behavior that attracted many to the Libertarians to the party in the first place.

Now that Ron Paul has gained some support, those same wackos are trying to hijack his candidacy as well. Neo-confederates, secessionists, 911 truthers have all come out of the woodwork in wild support of Dr. Paul. And the nation, which detests such views, is noticing. In response to this, to protect the reputation of the Libertarian party, many of its members are distancing themselves from the Paul campaign. They still agree with Paul's ideas and his message, but believe the preservation of the Libertarian party is more important.

I think we must face the fact that the libertarian community does include many racists and other unsavory characters who see in our message of limited government an opportunity to act on their creepy impulses—people whose own hostility to the state is rooted not in a love of individual freedom and human initiative as ours is, but in an opposition to modernity, secularism, equality, urban life and bourgeois values. We must make it clear that they aren’t welcome in our big tent.
-Freespace

I have a warning for members of the Libertarian party. Liberty is always going to be most attractive to the minority; the outcasts along the fringe. To support liberty it may be our individual duty to renounce the wackos, correct them, or let them frolic to make fools of themselves, but no group or individual has authority to silence them - much less one with respect for liberty. We must depend on a society best poised to allow their opponents the freedom to refute them. Liberty is a brutally honest thing, and a thing to be feared. It opens the flood gates allowing the loons to parade the streets in support of that which society rejects. It gives a mouthpiece to the ignorant, and to the knowledgeable, and expects truth will prevail. We accept it for many reasons. For example, the possibility that one day, throughout the centuries, there might come a time when one loon is proven right.

So it comes down to this. The defender of liberty is now being challenged. For those who believe Ron Paul's message is sound...Are you willing to defend your beliefs despite attacks to your character based on fallacious associations? Are you willing to pledge your life, fortune, and sacred honor in defense of liberty, or the Libertarian party? Does a libertarian employ their right to champion what is unpopular because it is right? Or, do they employ their right to defer their responsibility to an organization dedicated to promote liberty on their behalf? Can such an organization ever be true to its principles?

A population fooled into supporting individual liberty has already lost it.

(Some of this inspired by chapter 2 of On Liberty by John Stuart Mill).