Hatchet Job on Me

By -
This guy at Strike the Root defends Amanda Taylor's column. But he misquotes me! I didn't say hers was "the dumbest article ever." Rather, I said it was quite possibly the dumbest article I had ever read. Big difference.

(P.S. I haven't even read this yet. It's entirely possible that I will agree with him.)

Comments

  1. Margaret12:34 AM

    If it makes you feel any better, I went back and looked at her piece again. No matter what anyone says of her adherence to Rothbardian blah blah blah: There ain't no way in hell that I'll ever substitute any apple squeezins for the heavenly juice of the orange tree except under duress or a descent into madness.

    Her other points are silly. Why import food at all? Why not turn Central Park into a giant farm, if locally-produced is so important? Heck, why not move all the people in New York to the farms instead? Or perhaps to China. That's gotta be cheaper (in kilo-calories) to do once than send food to NYC for an average lifespan! Maybe it's the farms that have a people-deficit and that's why food has to be placed on trucks and planes to get it away from these evil black holes of vegetable matter.

    I would have been more impressed with her simple "hey, you should buy local cause it makes me happy" viewpoint if she had cut out the scare tactics and just elaborated on that: "It makes me happy because.... I'm paranoid about China not sending us vittles one of these days when we make them mad. I'm obsessed with the caloric value of jet fuel. I'd like the farmers who grow the apple cider (yuck) I like to stay in business. I'd like to think that the Chinese will have more food to eat. It makes me feel I'm getting more out of my food when I spend a couple extra bucks for a cabbage that grew in Jersey". That would have been more memorable than the feel bad garbage.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anonymous12:44 AM

    Hey guys, I apologize for leaving out the six words that qualify Bob's hyperbole. I don't think it's that big of a difference, because it doesn't mean I would need to change any other part of my article. I did include a link so anyone who followed it could see exactly what Bob wrote.

    Regardless, I hope that it is taken constructively. I'm not trying to make enemies of fellow market anarchists, but I'm not the type to preach to the choir either.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anonymous2:27 AM

    Infight!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Anonymous4:35 AM

    Dear Carlton, I would take your commentary constructively if I could understand what it was!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Anonymous4:19 AM

    Great article! Thanks.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Anonymous10:11 AM

    Nice Blog!

    ReplyDelete
  7. Anonymous10:12 AM

    Thanks for interesting article.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Anonymous11:47 AM

    Thank You! Very interesting article. Do you can write anything else about it?

    ReplyDelete
  9. Anonymous9:53 AM

    Very interesting site. Blog is very good. I am happy that I think the same!

    ReplyDelete
  10. Anonymous11:46 PM

    Excellent website. Good work. Very useful. I will bookmark!

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Libertarians, My Libertarians!

By -
Cruel to be kind means that I love you . Because, while I think you are mistaken, your hearts are in the right place -- yes, even you, Silas --  unlike some people . This Breitbart fellow (discussed in the link above), by all appearances, deliberately doctored a video of Shirley Sherrod to make her remarks appear virulently racist, when they had, in fact, the opposite import. I heard that at a recent Austrian conference, some folks were talking about "Callahan's conservative turn." While that description is not entirely inaccurate, I must say that a lot of these people who today call themselves conservative give me the heebie-jeebies.
Read more

"Pre-Galilean" Foolishness

By -
 I am currently reading The Master and His Emissary , which appears to be an excellent book. ("Appears" because I don't know the neuroscience literature well enough to say for sure, yet.) But then on page 186 I find: "Asking cognition, however, to give a perspective on the relationship between cognition and affect is like asking astronomer in the pre-Galilean geocentric world, whether, in his opinion, the sun moves round the earth of the earth around the sun. To ask a question alone would be enough to label one as mad." OK, this is garbage. First of all, it should be pre-Copernican, not pre-Galilean. But much worse is that people have seriously been considering heliocentrism for many centuries before Copernicus. Aristarchus had proposed a heliocentric model in the 4th-century BC. It had generally been considered wrong, but not "mad." (And wrong for scientific reasons: Why, for instance, did we not observe stellar parallax?) And when Copernicus propose
Read more