All posts by Thomas L. Knapp

For a Better America, Reject Pretty Please Puritanism

069-DUCKING OLD WOMAN

“Civilization,” H.L. Mencken wrote in 1918, “grows more and more maudlin and hysterical; especially under democracy it tends to degenerate into a mere combat of crazes; the whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, most of them imaginary.”

The more things change, the more they stay the same. A century later, American politics seems almost entirely centered around such hobgoblins.

Immigrants (especially “unvetted” immigrants).

Drugs (especially fentanyl, but pretty much anything purchased without a prescription).

Sex trafficking (which seems to consist of pretty much anyone buying, or selling, sex, known as “the world’s oldest profession” for a reason).

Moral panic — defined on Wikipedia as “a widespread feeling of fear that some evil person or thing threatens the values, interests, or well-being of a community or society” — has become our chief political currency.

It’s in the driver’s seat.

It has the wheel.

And it manifests as a form of puritanism, also conveniently defined by Mencken: “The haunting fear that someone, somewhere, may be happy.”

We can’t have that! Something must be done! There oughtta be a law! And the laws always  come down less to prohibition than to permission.

You can cross an imaginary line on the ground if you’ve been “vetted” and received a “visa.”

You can get high if you have permission from a doctor (who got permission from someone else to be a doctor).

You can have some fun in the sack if you pay for a marriage license or buy someone dinner and drinks, but not if you cut out the middlemen.

As a long-time libertarian, I naturally oppose any laws that forbid or regulate voluntary, peaceful actions undertaken by and between consenting adults.

I’ve come across many complex arguments for that position. I’ve made quite a few of those arguments myself. But more and more, I see it as a simple matter in both its both moral and practical aspects.

We don’t live in anything resembling a free society. Most of us don’t want to. We’ve let politicians use our irrational fear of Mencken’s hobgoblins turn us into, for all practical purposes, Mencken’s puritans — and that puritanism, in turn, generates new hobgoblins on demand to keep the merry-go-round turning.

The cycle is an ongoing and recurring feature of history. It has its ebbs and flows. It never goes away completely, but it comes on more strongly at some times than others.

At the moment, it’s at the worst I’ve seen it in my five decades or so of being old enough to observe it. The 1970s and 1980s had their down sides, but they were far more free (and far less irrational) than the 2020s.

How to we turn the tide and get things flowing in the other direction?

Instead of regaling you with schemes for panarchy, pleas for repealing this or that law, etc., let me propose a four-word position (which I got from “dL,” a pseudonymous commenter on my blog, years ago) that, if widely adopted, would make America a much better place to live.

The four words are: “Don’t need your permission.”

If an action doesn’t violate the rights of others, you shouldn’t need anyone else’s permission to do it.

If an action does violate the rights of others, no one can rightfully give you permission to do it anyway.

Everything else, including the entire body of libertarian political theory, is just details.

Anything else, including the entirety of political theory justifying the rule of some by others, is just excuses.

Act accordingly.

Thomas L. Knapp (X: @thomaslknapp | Bluesky: @knappster.bsky.social | Mastodon: @knappster) is director and senior news analyst at the William Lloyd Garrison Center for Libertarian Advocacy Journalism (thegarrisoncenter.org). He lives and works in north central Florida.

PUBLICATION/CITATION HISTORY

In Politics, the Celebrations Start Early and the Excuses Never End

Titanic sinking Wikivoyage feature banner

In a January 31 Texas special election to fill a vacant state Senate seat, union official Taylor Rehmet beat conservative political activist Leigh Wambsganss by 14 points — in a district where voters picked Donald Trump for president by 17 points only a little over a year ago.

It’s the latest of election victories boosting Democrats’ hopes for a “blue wave” this November and sending Republican political strategists into full-blown panic over the prospect of losing control of one or both houses of Congress.

Even if you’re convinced that the right electoral outcomes can really change the trajectory of events, though, it’s a little early to start celebrating — or mourning.

As Harold Wilson once pointed out, “a week is a long time in politics.”

The midterm congressional elections are, as I write this, 38 weeks away.

A lot can change in 38 weeks. Only 22 weeks separated Abraham Lincoln’s election in November of 1860 from the Confederate bombardment of Fort Sumter in 1861. Only 33 weeks separated George Bush’s inauguration in January of 2001 from the 9/11 attacks.

Events of much less long-term import have their effects as well.

Yes, the party in power historically tends to lose congressional seats in midterm elections. Sometimes a few, sometimes more. Beyond that obvious likelihood, trying to predict the mood of the electorate nine months out is a fool’s errand.

I can, however, confidently predict how much will change as a direct result of the elections’ outcomes, whatever those outcomes may be:

Not much.

Aside from a few firebrands and gadflies — some of whom may even get lucky at the polls — both parties will spend the next nine months tacking toward a wholly imaginary “center.”

We’ll hear a lot, from both sides of the aisle, about not throwing out the baby with the bathwater (even if, as Harry Browne suggested, it’s Rosemary’s Baby).

On immigration enforcement, tariffs, healthcare, you name it, we’ll see a bunch of proposals for tweaking, rather than truly disrupting, business as usual. The only reliable way to tell the two sides apart will be to listen to them yell “fascist!” and “commie!” at each other in between the echoes.

And hey, who knows? Maybe a few of those tweaks will actually get implemented in 2027. The Titanic will still be sinking, but by golly the deck chairs will be nicely arranged for just a little while longer.

Politics won’t get us out of the mess that politics got us into.

But once the celebration that’s already prematurely cranking up ends, we’ll hear endless explanations of, and excuses for, why it didn’t work last time, why it didn’t work this time, and why it will no doubt, for sure, pinky promise work next time if we just keep on voting really, really hard.

Thomas L. Knapp (X: @thomaslknapp | Bluesky: @knappster.bsky.social | Mastodon: @knappster) is director and senior news analyst at the William Lloyd Garrison Center for Libertarian Advocacy Journalism (thegarrisoncenter.org). He lives and works in north central Florida.

PUBLICATION/CITATION HISTORY

When Life Hands Trump the Epstein Files, Trump Makes Lemon Aid

Citrus x limon, lemon on tree, Coín, Spain

On January 29, secret federal police (“Homeland Security Investigations”) arrested journalists Don Lemon and Georgia Fort for covering, and activists Trahern Jeen Crews and Jamael Lydell Lundy for planning and organizing, a protest at a St. Paul, Minnesota church.

Arresting two journalists for covering an event most Americans correctly condemned — if you want to hold a protest during a religious service, hold it somewhere other than in the church — is a great way to create a “chilling effect” on journalism … and distract the public’s attention from other events.

If Crews and Lydell did indeed to conspire to violate the rights of others (a crime under 18 U.S.C. §241) and to interfere with religious worship (a crime under 18 U.S.C. §248), they’ll hopefully be held to appropriate legal account.

But covering such events as news isn’t a crime. It’s unlikely that the charges against Lemon and Fort will avoid dismissal by a judge and make it all the way to trial, and even more unlikely that a jury will convict them. Their arrests were part of a public relations campaign. Look! Shiny object!

So, why arrest them on January 29?

For the same reason president Donald Trump picked that day to declare yet another fake “state of emergency,” this time concerning the sudden and urgent importance  of the “Threats to the United States by the Government of Cuba” that US presidents have asserted periodically over the last 72 years.

On January 30, the US Department of Justice three million pages of documents, 2,000 videos, and 180,000 images pursuant to its halting, overdue, and partial compliance with the Epstein Files Transparency Act. Another three million pages are, according to federal prosecutors, “potentially responsive” the law’s requirements, but DOJ says it’s done bothering with little things like obeying the law where the late sexual predator Jeffrey Epstein is concerned.

Don’t look, Ethel! (Too late).

At least 4,500 of the three million documents mention Trump himself. Those mentions include evidence that he associated with Epstein for longer, and until later, than he’s previously claimed, and that he flew on Epstein’s private jet more times than he’s previously admitted. They also include allegations — not proven — of his involvement in the sexual abuse of minor girls and the murder of an infant born to one of those girls.

Other documents in the tranche shed light on (or at least bring heat on) Epstein’s relationships with  powerful people such as Bill Gates, Elon Musk, Howard Lutnick, and Trump’s prospective nominee to head the Federal Reserve, Kevin Warsh.

Kinda makes one wonder what’s in the files they AREN’T releasing, doesn’t it?

I guess I can see why Trump and friends picked January 29 to pour some Lemon aid into the ol’ news cycle.

Nice try, but no Cuban cigar.

Thomas L. Knapp (X: @thomaslknapp | Bluesky: @knappster.bsky.social | Mastodon: @knappster) is director and senior news analyst at the William Lloyd Garrison Center for Libertarian Advocacy Journalism (thegarrisoncenter.org). He lives and works in north central Florida.

PUBLICATION/CITATION HISTORY