The season six winner of “The Bachelor”… Mary Delgado — who was arrested last year for allegedly punching her fiance, “Bachelor” Byron Velvick — was busted again on Saturday night for public intoxication, resisting arrest and disorderly conduct at Lorina’s Cantina in Del Rio, Texas.

We’re told the Cantina called the cops because Delgado refused to leave the bar, saying it was her “constitutional right” to stay as long as she wanted. [emphasis mine]

Golden.

What an utterly warped understanding of rights – that negates the property owner’s rights entirely, replacing them with a fictitious (and seemingly unconditional) set of patron rights.

We need a term for it. Let’s call it pulling-an-Adbusters. It appears to be the foundation for their moral code… and quickly moving outward.

From my least-favorite-2008-presidential-candidate’s brand-new book Do the Right Thing:

The real threat to the Republican Party is something we saw a lot of this past election cycle: libertarianism masked as conservatism. And it threatens to not only split the Republican Party, but render it as irrelevant as the Whig Party.

Of course, I’d frame it inversely, that the real and most damaging threat to liberty is the Republican Party, whose alligients oh-so-casually throw around the small-government lingo but fail to deliver on anything even remotely close.

Instead, decade after decade with their paternalistic impulses, hyper-religious moralism, and corporate socialism, the association continues to bastardize the philosophical reputation of liberty.

Check out its Wikipedia page and you’ll find out some straightforward background info:

Hakani is a controversial movie addressing the theme of infanticide in tribal communities in Brazil. The film takes the format of a documentary featuring a dramatic reconstruction of the true story of an attempted infanticide…The movie is part of a wider movement against infanticide amongst Brazilian Amazonian tribes. The pressure brought by the movie has brought the issue into the public eye and as far as the Brazilian Congress with a new law, Muwaji’s Law, being proposed. The law would allow an Indian child to be removed from its parents on the evidence that the child might be the target of a planned infanticide.

And then some information that is, perhaps, more disturbing than the promo. The film has its critics.

Opposition to a film effectively decrying infanticide? On what basis? Well, the most vocal of them is a purported “human rights” (uh…) organization called Survival International. Now, for SI, what legitimizes this viciously cruel, superstitiously-inspired sacrifice of an innocent life?

The organisation claims that the film is a tool for evangelical Christian groups to increase their ability to spread religious belief despite the Brazilian government’s concerns about their methods.

You know, when it comes to being buried alive or receiving theological proselytizing, I think I’ll take the proselytizing.

A symptom of ethical relativism. Really. That’s disgusting.

Abusters lost the case and, in realizing that you can’t simply force another into business – that it, in fact, takes the mutual consent of both parties to make a contract valid – apparently now rejects the very concept, evident by one of the latest ABTV videos.

Titled Ad-idas, the 5-minute video documents Neil Boorman’s quest “to claim due advertising fees from a brand giant”.

The brand giant in question is Adidas and the “due advertising fees”? According to Boorman, it amounts to 10,000 pounds based upon – nothing consensual, of course, but rather – the 10-15 years Boorman has voluntarily spent being a “human billboard” for the company. You know, wearing Adidas shirts, shorts and shoes out in public.

Now obviously, Mr. Boorman isn’t a true Adidas fan. He isn’t a fan of any corporation. In the same vein as Naomi Klein, he’s a hardcore anti-consumerist borderline luddite; and in the same vein as Michael Moore, the video is dishonest in strategy but authentic in message. But yes, Boorman believes this garbage. As the tagline states, “Why do we buy clothes that advertise brands? They should be paying us!”.

Yeah!

Companies should be paying consumers who choose to buy their branded products for the subsequent advertising that the aforementioned companies never asked for. The consumers deserve it. It’s just!

Yes. In fact, tomorrow I’ll be sending Adbusters an invoice for showcasing the crappy Neil Boorman video in question.

Take a look. Or don’t! It doesn’t matter really. There isn’t a contract or any criteria whatsoever I have to meet. I don’t even have to speak highly of the content. I determine what they owe me. It’s that simple!

When did the idea of freedom become a political orphan?

Steve Chapman

September 7, 2008

This year’s Republican National Convention had a different theme for each day. Monday was “Serving a Cause Greater than Self.” Tuesday was “Service,” Wednesday was “Reform” and Thursday was “Peace.”

“We must, and we shall, set the tide running again in the cause of freedom. And this party, with its every action, every word, every breath, and every heartbeat, has but a single resolve, and that is freedom. “

—Barry Goldwater, accepting the 1964 Republican presidential nomination

So what was missing? Only what used to be held up as the central ideal of the party. The heirs of Goldwater couldn’t spare a day for freedom.

Neither could the Democrats. Their daily topics this year were “One Nation,” “Renewing America’s Promise” and “Securing America’s Future.” The party proclaimed “an agenda that emphasizes the security of our nation, strong economic growth, affordable health care for all Americans, retirement security, honest government, and civil rights.” Expanding and upholding individual liberty? Not so much.

Forty-four years after Goldwater’s declaration, it’s clear that collectivism, not individualism, is the reigning creed of Republicans as well as Democrats. Individuals are not valuable and precious in their own right but as a means for those in power to achieve their grand ambitions.

You will scour the presidential nominees’ acceptance speeches in vain for any hint that your life is rightfully your own, to be lived in accordance with your beliefs and desires and no one else’s. The Founding Fathers set out to protect “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness,” but Barack Obama has a different idea.

The “essence of America’s promise,” he declared in Denver, is “individual responsibility and mutual responsibility”—rather than, say, individual freedom and mutual respect for rights. The “promise of America,” he said, is “the fundamental belief that I am my brother’s keeper; I am my sister’s keeper.”

In reality, that fundamental belief is what you might call the promise of socialism. What has set this country apart since its inception is not the notion of obligations but the notion of rights.

“All previous systems had regarded man as a sacrificial means to the ends of others, and society as an end in itself,” wrote the novelist and philosopher Ayn Rand. “The United States regarded man as an end in himself, and society as a means to the peaceful, orderly, voluntary co-existence of individuals.”

That idea got lost somewhere between Thomas Jefferson and John McCain. What do Republicans believe in? McCain told us Thursday: “We believe in a strong defense, work, faith, service, a culture of life, personal responsibility, the rule of law . . . We believe in the values of families, neighborhoods and communities.”

Would it be too much to mention that what sustains the American vision of those things is freedom? That without it, personal responsibility becomes hollow and service is servitude?

Apparently it would. Republicans are big on promoting freedom abroad, but in this country, the term encompasses a lot of things they don’t like—the right to a “homosexual lifestyle,” the right to protest the Iraq war, the right to privacy, the right not to recite the Pledge of Allegiance, and more. Conservatives who once thought Americans had too little freedom now sometimes think they have too much.

Liberals, on the other hand, are wary of embracing freedom precisely because of its historic importance to the right. They fear it means curbing the power of a government whose reach they want to expand.

While they value many personal liberties, they have no great attachment to forms of freedom that involve buying, selling, trading and accumulating. Those, after all, can involve selfishness, and Democrats, like Republicans, don’t want to protect selfishness.

But freedom isn’t freedom without the right to pursue what you value—money or knowledge, pleasure or sacrifice, God or atheism, community or misanthropic solitude—rather than what others think you should value. It includes the right to go to hell, and the right to tell others to do the same.

The latter is a valuable prerogative that we have not yet lost. After watching the conventions, if you have the urge to use it on either of the two major parties, feel free. If he were alive, Barry Goldwater might join you.

Steve Chapman is a member of the Tribune’s editorial board. He blogs at chicagotribune.com/chapman and his e-mail address is schapman@tribune.com

Digg it!

Agree? Disagree? Tell me what you think…

Why be sad when happiness can be bought for a little more then free
Modern day prohibition
Are we men? Are we children?
At what age can I choose how to live

The only real drug problem is scoring real good drugs
Haven’t we learned our lesson
The corner store sells finer scotch
But who’s got uncut powder?
We just want what is ours! Dignity!

Hear, hear!

Nofx — Herojuana

Yes, not the most inspiring view of the human condition, and not the view that most Americans accept. Myself included.

But this pandering to “ordinary Americans” is annoying in all sorts of ways. Isn’t America supposed to be a meritocracy? Two-thirds of Americans reject the idea that people’s chances in life are determined by circumstances that are beyond their control, a far higher proportion than in Europe. Almost 90% say that they admire people who have got rich through hard work. Yet whenever elections come around politicians treat the people at the bottom of the heap as the embodiment of American values. And aren’t Americans supposed to believe in self-reliance? America’s farms are some of the country’s biggest subsidy hogs. Many small towns-Congressman Jack Murtha’s Johnstown in central Pennsylvania is an egregious example-are kept alive only by federal pork. [emphasis mine]

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: we are more than mere automatons. Own it!

An odd psychology, indeed…one that celebrated its underground quality, its exclusiveness, in a totally ostentatious manner. I mean, I went of of my way to advertise the punk and ska bands I liked, only to condemn them when they achieved commercial success (i.e. Green Day, Goldfinger, Blink 182)

…as if money corrupted the creative process or purity or whatever, I’m not sure. I said “sell out” and “poseur” a lot though–I was dumb and in high school.

Anyways, in 1994, the Santa-Barbara based punk band Lagwagon put out the album Trashed and the song “Know it all” quickly became a fan favorite. It’s a song made fun of this music-snob attitude–it’s stupidity, it’s hypocrisy.

A few lyrical excerpts:

And alot of the bands on the college charts are great bands
Until they get signed. Then you hate them
It’s such bullshit – you used to love them you hypocrite…

I remember you and I listening to bands that we liked
Only the songs mattered to you
But now you’re a D.J. and preaching that hype
“Corporate Rock Sucks”…

The bands are good ’til they make enough cash
To eat food and get a pad
Then they’re sold out and their music is cliché
Because talent’s exclusive to bands without pay…

Why am mentioning this? And, moreover, why is this song apart of my libertarian dance party mix?

Because I think this song speaks to the belief that the exchange of money corrupts integrity and creativity, that commerce negates morality. That getting paid for one’s talent diminishes the value or meaning of that talent. (It doesn’t.)

And you can’t say that this attitude doesn’t exist. All to often it finds its way into our public policy, obfuscating legitimate issues like organ transplants or prostitution and making debate on their merits a pipe dream.

I don’t think that’s a stretch.

In any case, it’s a great song. Enjoy.

Lagwagon – Know it all

Firstly, I’m not sure if I made it explicit in my last post, but I was in St. Louis, Missouri all last week documenting a state-wide civil rights initiative. Pretty awesome stuff.

See! Right there to the left. Me and visual substantiation of my claim.

Anyhow, I made a video during my time there…which, should be up if not tomorrow then early next week.

Second up, coming form my current geographical location there’s a somewhat comical—actually, no,very disturbing—story today about three teens accused of digging up an old grave and stealing the skull to use as a bong. While I fully denounce such disrespect—done to the carcass of what once housed an autonomous human agent—I can’t help but mock the on-duty policeman’s report:

“(He) suggested they had actually dug up a grave in an unrelated incident and ultimately removed the head of a corpse,” Houston Police Officer Jim Adkins said. “By what he told me, they turned it into a device used to smoke marijuana, which is referred to as a bong.”

Thank you Ward Clever.

A picture of the stupid <shakes head> stupid adolescents now:

Let’s see. What else. Ah, on my way out of the bank today, I heard a 40-something customer talking to an employee about the class-action-lawsuit check he was holding. Big bucks. I’m wondering how much it was; I’m sure more than pure justice would restitute…

Moving on, I don’t know how I can claim I’m all about libertarian dance parties and not have been on top of this.

Lastly, I change my mind. I will cross into ideology:

Surrounding my St. Louis hotel I counted more than 10 unions. In like a 2 block radius. Yeah, union central.

Union yes? Eh…no thanks.