Principles

In the book, I offered two possible solutions for the conflict between Israel and Palestine.  One possibility I suggested was the complete social and political unification of the entire territory of Israel and Palestine; and the other was the much vaunted “Two State Solution.”

The present military action in the Gaza Strip has forced me to spend some time evaluating my position and as a result I no longer consider one of those ideas to be a viable possibility.

Not A Solution

The “Two State Solution” is not a solution at all. 

(more…)

I received feedback from a reader named Ryan C. that deserves a response.

Ryan stated that he thought the principle I upheld in my discussion of the situation in Palestine conflicted with the principle which I promoted in my discussion of the situation in Tibet.
(more…)

In chapter 6 “Basic Rights” under section 6.2.1 “Habeas Corpus” I briefly mention the case of Maher Arar, a Canadian who was abducted in New York and taken to Syria, where he was tortured and detained without any legal justification.  Since then Arar has been cleared by the Canadian government of any connection to terrorism.  His appeal of his case is still pending in US court, after having been twice declined on the basis that simply hearing his case would pose a threat to United States national security.

Today Arar was the guest on Fresh Air with Terry Gross on National Public Radio.  His story is shocking, compelling, and horrifying to people who believe in basic human rights.  For anyone who missed it, this interview is well worth a listen.
(more…)

In “Consciously Creating Positive Social Change,” the concluding chapter of Principles for a Self-Directed Society, I propose a novel concept which I am quite proud of and which I thought was completely original. Certainly I had never before heard anyone discuss a concept that was similar to mine. The idea is to build a planned community as a single megastructure in pyramidal form, with industrial functions in the interior base, business offices and shops in the central interior, and residential communities all around the outside. I pictured a tree-lined, terraced community powered by solar panels and wind turbines, with greenhouses surrounding the structure’s base. The purpose is to be as nearly self-sufficient and ecologically sustainable as possible. Clearly trade with the outside world is indispensable; no single small community could conceivably manufacture all the high-technology items it would require in today’s society, and attempting to do so would not be a practical use of time and resources. However, a well-planned community of this type could go a long way towards self-sufficiency, and would minimize its members’ ecological impact and carbon footprint. I was very proud of this idea, although I was concerned that the engineering challenges and fabulous costs that would be associated with a massive construction project of this type would relegate my idea to the annals of science fiction for the time being. Imagine my surprise when I learned that this idea is not new after all!
(more…)

If you have just reached this website, welcome!  This particular blog entry is by no means the most interesting post on this site.  This entry is strictly concerned with minor details.  I encourage you to read some of the other posts, which are much more lively.

If you have read the book and were confused by any of the following errors, I regret the inconvenience.  Because of that potential for confusion I felt it was important to post these corrections here on my website, with apologies that some of this may read like the USA Patriot Act, if you’ve ever tried to read that piece of legislation.
(more…)

In Principles for a Self-Directed Society, I specifically take a position favoring the right of ordinary civilians to own such weapons as they may choose to own. I based my argument on the Jeffersonian notion of civil defense; and I also cited the reasonable desire of a person to engage in sport hunting. I should have included in the section the further assertion that it is reasonable for a person to own a weapon for the purpose of defending their home. Fortunately, the Supreme Court ruled on June 26, 2008 in the case District of Columbia v. Heller (07-290) that the Second Amendment does guarantee an individual the right to own a weapon. This vindication of the obvious interpretation of the Second Amendment will most likely remain largely unchallenged for several generations, given the difficulty of the issue and the Court’s policy of deferring to precedent whenever possible. When, in some future time, this question is again brought before the high court, I hope they will again rule in favor of freedom.

In the meantime, I wish the Supreme Court would rule in favor of the rights and freedoms of the individual more often– but that sounds like a different topic.