A Posteriori

According to Slashdot, the Total Information Awareness (TIA) program, which was cancelled by the U.S. Congress two years ago, is still operating. This was presumably a decision made by the Bush Administration in defiance of the will of the legislative branch.

http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/02/25/1413241

Were I an American citizen, what moral reason would I have to obey the law if my own leaders were breaking it? The only possible incentive I would have for obeying the law would be to avoid imprisonment, or some other punishment.

Furthermore, why should I bother voting? My vote for a presidential candidate won’t be properly counted, and my Senator or Representative’s vote on legislative matters is no longer relevant.

As with the illegal wiretaps, the Bush Administration has broken the law. This criminal administration uses the cloaking shield of “fighting terrorism” to refute all opposing moral arguments.

This, along with the revelation of massive irregularities with electronic voting machines in Florida should demonstrate the administration’s total contempt for democracy. It’s an indisputable fact that if Florida had gone John Kerry’s way, that he would be president today.

So the U.S. now has an un-elected executive branch (by virtue of electronic voting sabotage), and a legislative branch (as exemplified by the continuation of TIA despite its wish) that is completely impotent. There should be absolutely no doubt whatsoever now. The United States is no longer a democracy, but is in fact a fascist dictatorship.

According to Google News, the World Trade Organization has ruled against the European Union restriction against restrictions of genetically engineered crops.

Now, let’s think about this for a second. Without having searched for European polling data on the subject, I think it’s still safe to assume that a majority of Europeans are against the import of genetically engineered food. As the government that is charged with representing the popular will of Europeans, it’s the EU’s duty to govern in the interest of the population at large.

Except that somehow, someway, it has been decreed by the self-appointed prophets of the free market that an extra-governmental institution such as the WTO has the right to overrule a government that is, at least on the surface, democratically elected. Furthermore, this extra-governmental body isn’t subject to any constitution or legal precedent. It has the power to unilaterally rule on matters of trade, presumably drawing from its bias in favour of corporate interests.

There is no oversight for this “free trade” organization. WTO rulings, to the best of my knowledge, cannot be overridden by democratic referendum or national court rulings, after all appeals are exhausted. The government subject to this ruling must either comply or find itself kicked out of the WTO, suffering the consequences of reduced international trade.

It’s even more perverse that the country that effectively controls the WTO, the United States, chose to ignore a North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) ruling in Canada’s favour that requires the U.S. to remove its tariffs on Canadian lumber, claiming the supremacy of the favourable WTO ruling over the unfavourable NAFTA ruling.

European sensitivities about the potentially hazardous effects of taking genes from different forms of plant life or the ethical bankruptcy of terminator seeds be damned! Corporate profits must be protected at all costs!

It’s hard to believe that people of any race, culture, or religion could get so worked up over a simple cartoon caricature. I’m sure there have been caricatures made of God, Christ, rabbis, budda, etc, without nary a protest.

So when Muslims use simplistic “heresy” as an excuse to run around and smash stuff up, it doesn’t speak well of their religion, culture, or tolerance. Prominent Muslims have complained that their culture is unfairly stereotyped as inherently violent and intolerant. Fine. But this recent smash-fest, along with the death-mark against Salmon Rushdie totally undermines their arguments.

Where is the condemnation from prominent Muslims for this action? As of this writing, I don’t see it. Condoning this violence and vandalism is contemptible and thoroughly unacceptable.

The protesters’ argument is that free speech should be limited. This is the same argument the totalitarian Chinese made in asking Google to censor its search results. Actions to limit free speech is a slippery slope that can lead all the way to outright censorship and condemnation of any “blasphemous” , “inappropriate”, or “non-sanctioned” speech. The entire continuum of this slippery slope can have a chilling effect on freedom of expression. A society that allows legitimate freedom of expression is a healthy, vibrant, dynamic society. Limits to free speech should stop right at speech that promotes hatred and violence. A cartoon of a dead Arab prophet does not promote hatred or violence (well, it didn’t intend to, which is the litmus test here).

Another thing that these Muslim protesters don’t seem to understand is the separation between the Danish state and the Danish newspaper that published the cartoon. I assume the Danish newspaper is a privately owned institution that is not controlled in any way, shape, or form by the Danish government. The protest on the Danish embassy proves that they don’t understand the distinction, don’t accept it, or expect the Danish government to micro-manage its newspapers. Either view is thoroughly unacceptable in a liberal democracy.

What the Muslim protesters have proven is that there is either a strong minority, or outright majority of Muslims who wish to dictate how the Western world should govern its own affairs:

1) Western governments should severely limit free speech more so than it is now.
2) Western governments should micromanage any media within their countries, or possibly nationalize those media.
3) Western governments should actively overrule their courts on any judgements related to constitutional free speech rights and possibly totally neuter their courts.

The Muslim world has every right to tell the Western world to butt out of its affairs and stop occupying their countries (re: Iraq). The implied (by the cartoon protests) attempt to establish a theological empire on the free world is absolutely reprehensible.