The Fresh Politics Reader: Making Current Events And Public Affairs Relevant to Young Americans

289 Pages·2006·0.71 MB·English

by  Taylor W. Buley

the
fresh politics
reader
making
current events
and public affairs
relevant to young
americans
taylor w. buley
S L P
I L V E R A K E U B L I S H I N G
, ,
L O S A N G E L E S C A ̶̶̶̶̶ A B E R D E E N W A
The Fresh Politics Reader
Making Current Events and Public Affairs
Relevant to Young Americans
First edition, 2006
Copyright © 2006 by Taylor W. Buley
Silver Lake Publishing
111 East Wishkah Street
Aberdeen, WA 98520
For a list of other publications or for more information, please call
1.360.532.5758. Find our Web site at www.silverlakepub.com.
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in
a retrieval system or transcribed in any form or by any means (elec-
tronic, mechanical, photocopy, recording or otherwise) without the
prior written permission of Silver Lake Publishing.
Library of Congress Catalogue Number: Pending
Buley, Taylor W.
The Fresh Politics Reader
Making Current Events and Public Affairs
Relevant to Young Americans
Includes index.
Pages: 288
ISBN: 1-56343-835-6
TTTTTaaaaabbbbbllllleeeee ooooofffff CCCCCooooonnnnnttttteeeeennnnntttttsssss
CCCCCooooonnnnnttttteeeeennnnntttttsssss
Introduction:..................................................................... 1
Part One: Personal Liberty
Chapter 1:
The Meaning of Life ......................................................... 9
Chapter 2:
Drugs .............................................................................. 23
Chapter 3:
Gun Ownership & Personal Security ................................. 41
Chapter 4:
Marriage & Sexuality ......................................................... 59
Chapter 5:
Getting Education ............................................................77
Chapter 6:
Information & The Media ................................................. 101
Part Two: Public Policy
Chapter 7:
The Environment.............................................................. 129
Chapter 8:
Energy Policy .................................................................... 157
TTTTThhhhheeeee FFFFFrrrrreeeeessssshhhhh PPPPPooooollllliiiiitttttiiiiicccccsssss RRRRReeeeeaaaaadddddeeeeerrrrr
Chapter 9:
Taxes & Fiscal Policy ........................................................ 173
Chapter 10:
Health Care ....................................................................... 197
Chapter 11:
Foreign Policy & National Defense ....................................221
Chapter 12:
Social Security .................................................................... 231
Chapter 13:
Affirmative Action ............................................................... 245
Conclusion:..................................................................... 271
Index ................................................................................275
Author’s Note ...................................................................283
IIIIInnnnntttttrrrrroooooddddduuuuuccccctttttiiiiiooooonnnnn
IIIIInnnnntttttrrrrroooooddddduuuuuccccctttttiiiiiooooonnnnn
Welcome to the 21st Century. The information age. The time of
miracles and wonder.
Weren’t things supposed to be different?
We’re carrying a lot of political weight from the previous era.
Americans have had countless national discussions about gun owner-
ship and the death penalty. We’ve debated affirmative action and abor-
tion for three decades. We’ve whispered about drug policy reform for
years. And everyone over 30 knows that everyone under 30 is going
to be screwed once health care and Social Security collapse.
America was founded by people who hated this kind of institu-
tional corruption and laziness. They believed in a rugged sense of
individual liberty and a government that was as small as possible.
Current events and public affairs have become mechanical. Like a
set of swinging balls on an executive’s desk, political momentum swings
back and forth in perpetual motion. Power shifts with a click, and
returns with a clack.
Click, clack, click clack, click clack.
Political laziness works in this kind of momentum. Inertia. For
many people, inertia can be controlling. Not everyone can pick up a
Wall Street Journal editorial page and know what’s going on. Some-
times, the simple truth can seem strange.
11111
TTTTThhhhheeeee FFFFFrrrrreeeeessssshhhhh PPPPPooooollllliiiiitttttiiiiicccccsssss RRRRReeeeeaaaaadddddeeeeerrrrr
Imagine yourself sitting in a train, looking out. From inside, if
you try to look at the whole landscape the scene can be overwhelming
—everything is blurred together as you pass objects at high speed.
But as you focus on the particulars, you start to pick out objects. This
is the same experience you can have with politics. At first, it can be
confusing and sometime overwhelming. But, as you learn how to
understand what you are seeing, you start to pick out particulars and
you can notice irregularities in the political landscape.
This is what this book sets out to accomplish. I want to help you
understand the goings on of politics and learn to spot certain reoccur-
ring themes.
Politics Are Relevant
The subtitle of this book is a bit misleading. It makes you believe
that someone needs to make politics relevant to young Americans. In
reality, politics are perfectly relevant on their own.
Current events and public affairs play a role in our everyday life,
whether young Americans acknowledge them or not. The idea be-
hind this book is to make you aware of how relevant politics are.
This isn’t 280 pages of soapboxing: I’m not going to tell you why
you should care about politics—instead, I hope to shed some light on
why you already care about politics.
I’m a libertarian. You don’t have to be to get some use out of this
book. But you need to believe something about how politics works.
The philosophical underpinnings of libertarianism and its oppo-
site, statism, are present in every political discussion. They’re part of
people’s everyday life—yet most people don’t know that there’s a dif-
ference between the two concepts.
Libertarianism is the idea that an individual should be free to
decide what is best for himself or herself without government inter-
vention. Basically, at any point, in time we should all have the ability
to choose between yes and no for ourselves.
22222
IIIIInnnnntttttrrrrroooooddddduuuuuccccctttttiiiiiooooonnnnn
My philosophy believes strongly in cause and effect—the conse-
quences of actions. And it is firmly grounded in the belief that most
people are capable of making good decisions.
Too often, the government intervenes and says that an individual
cannot possibly make a good decision. When legislators think people
can’t make a rational choice about something, they enact a law that
makes the decision for us. This distrust informs the philosophy of
statism. The government doesn’t think I can keep myself from doing
crack, so it makes the substance illegal to discourage me from even
considering it. Same with laws prohibiting base jumping—they’re
intended to keep me from jumping off of buildings with a parachute.
The impulse may be right…but do we need a law about it?
Although these are just small examples of the asinine statism run-
ning rampant in our society, they should help you start to develop an
awareness of this particular (and dangerous) brand of philosophy. Would
you jump off a building if you’re friends told you to? Or is that a
stupid question? If your answer was yes to that last bit, you don’t have
to be told not to base jump. But you probably can think of other risky
directions you’ve made in the past.
Try this paternalistic law: Don’t play in the street. When was the last
time the state told me this? This morning. Statist mandates are all
around us and in more places than you might think. More than ever,
the government is taking an active role in how you make your deci-
sions. And, more now than ever, we’re starting to notice.
On my way to class this morning, I noticed just how much stat-
ism grinds my gears. It happened on the corner of 38th and Walnut
Street in Philadelphia. I was running late for an early morning class,
coffee in hand and got stuck (yet again) at an crosswalk sign signaling
that it was too dangerous for me to cross the street—except there were
no cars in sight. The sign, in illuminated neon, was telling me not to
play in the street.
So what do I do? I crossed the street. And you know what? I
didn’t die. But I did break a law.
33333
TTTTThhhhheeeee FFFFFrrrrreeeeessssshhhhh PPPPPooooollllliiiiitttttiiiiicccccsssss RRRRReeeeeaaaaadddddeeeeerrrrr
It’s not just me who’s breaking those silly crosswalk laws every
damn day here in Philadelphia. If you were to sit on my Philadelphia
balcony with me, you could witness a magnificent display of libertari-
anism. Sit on my porch on any given day and you’ll see dozens of
people crossing the street at unmarked locations. Most of these rea-
sonably smart people pay no honor to pedestrian signage.
So why have these laws in the first place?
Crosswalks are intended to keep the flow of traffic fluid between
cars and pedestrians. Crosswalk laws are based on the idea that you’re
too stupid not to play in the street. Rather, you’re too stupid to play
in the street without the government’s permission.
The problem is that crosswalks are incredibly inefficient. If you’ve
ever been running late for something and stuck at an empty light,
you know what I’m talking about. You’ve experienced firsthand the
ire that accompanies statist laws: the frustration of being told no when
yes is clearly the answer.
Too Many “Laws Which Cannot Be Enforced”
Albert Einstein once wrote that “nothing is more destructive of
respect for the government and the law of the land than passing laws
which cannot be enforced.” If this is true, jaywalking laws might be
the al Qaida of statism.
Rationality says you shouldn’t have to give in to the social con-
tract if it doesn’t benefit you. While crosswalks do a good job at, say,
getting blind people across the street safely, they do little but con-
strict my freedom of movement.
But maybe you’ve never been stuck at an efficient light or
rolled a stop sign; perhaps you need anther example of the everyday
presence of statism for you to believe in the everyday relevance of
distinguishing libertarian and statist philosophy. If this is the case,
don’t worry—you don’t have to leave the driveway to see how statism
effects your decision making.
44444
IIIIInnnnntttttrrrrroooooddddduuuuuccccctttttiiiiiooooonnnnn
My parents recently sold my truck to get my sister a nice girlie
car. While I really liked my pickup, I have to admit that it did sound
like it was going to explode. So I kind of liked the idea of a new car.
Anyway, my happiness ended about 30 seconds into my first car ride.
I get in the car, turn the key in and put the vehicle in reverse...
and BAM! My car bursts into an electric falsetto. I forgot to put my
seat belt on.
I should make it clear that you should always wear your seat belt.
It’s the rational decision to make, and most people know that. But in
this case, my rational decision was to leave my seat belt off, so I could
look over my shoulder comfortably as I maneuvered the car out of my
wide, suburban Wisconsin driveway. But my car didn’t like my choice
to remain seat beltless. The car was kindly (and annoyingly) letting
me know that I had forgotten to buckle my seat belt, as if I hadn’t
considered the option of wearing one. Like Morse code the beeping
screamed: “Put on your seat belt!”
If I were a cartoon, at this point you would have been able to see
anger fumes coming out of my ears.
If you drive, you’ve been in at least one situation where you have
found it rational to leave your seat belt off. Sometimes, seat belts are
impractical. Think about the underpinnings to seat belt and jaywalk-
ing laws; they’re not based on the same philosophy as the ones that
tell you to drive on the right side of the road or you not to kill.
You see, crosswalk and seat belt laws are not the same brand of
law that tells you to drive on the right side of the road. Those laws are
aimed at protecting others from you, crosswalk and seat belt laws are
meant to protect you from yourself.
Generally, it’s a good rule of thumb that wherever the govern-
ment tries to protect us from ourselves, it’s gone too far. Ronald Reagan
articulated this view:
[T]he first and most important thing is that government
exists to protect us from each other. Government exists, of course,
for the defense of the nation, and for the defense of the rights of
55555