Milton Friedman I’m saddened to learn of Milton Friedman’s death. I didn’t know him personally (though I’ve met his son and corresponded with his grandson; my sympathy to them both), and his flavour of libertarianism wasn’t mine, but he was an articulate, influential, and charming defender of liberty, and wasn’t afraid to take un-Republican stands on issues like military conscription, corporate welfare, and drug prohibition. I have pleasant memories of watching the original full-length version of his Free to Choose miniseries on PBS during my high school days. See Richard Ebeling and Sheldon Richman’s tribute here.

Ayn Rand On a happier note, I’m pleased and honoured to note that I’ve been added to the editorial board of Chris Sciabarra’s Journal of Ayn Rand Studies. (Now the Right-Randians can add another organisation to their list of classical liberal institutions that have been infected by the whim-worshipping, chaos-fomenting taint….)

I’ve spent the past four weekends giving talks at, respectively, the Alabama Philosophical Society in Tuscaloosa, the Mises Institute Supporters’ Summit in Auburn, the Murphy Institute in New Orleans, and Revoluticon in Asheville. Which means I’ve been even more pressed for time than usual. I hope to get a chance to blog about the above over Thanksgiving.

Don't taser me! In the meantime, here are two recent pieces of mine, now online:

My talk at the Mises Institute conference on imperialism, What Empire Does to a Culture (see discussion here and here); and my Center for a Stateless Society op-ed on last Tuesday’s UCLA tasering incident, What Makes Police Brutality Possible? (see also Charles Johnson’s post).

More soon!

, ,

7 Responses to Passages

  1. T.J. Van Wyk November 17, 2006 at 9:21 pm #

    Just thought I’d say this: as usual, great articles, Dr. Long.

  2. Justin November 18, 2006 at 4:11 pm #

    Regarding “What makes police brutality possible?”:

    Your article mentions that the officers did not have lethal weapons on their person. Do you have a source for this? They are “real” cops, so I assume that they would have a firearm, unless prohibited in California perhaps.

    My point is that I can see a group of 50 students stopping 3 unarmed officers clearly abusing their power, but I cannot see anyone willing to get killed for it. The situation changes very quickly depending on the availability of lethal force.

    I’ve held a burning tear gas grenade in my hand, but getting hit with a .40 cal jacketed hollow point bullet to the chest is quite different…

    Excellent article though.

  3. T.J. Van Wyk November 19, 2006 at 1:33 am #

    “Your article mentions that the officers did not have lethal weapons on their person. Do you have a source for this? They are “real” cops, so I assume that they would have a firearm, unless prohibited in California perhaps.”

    Well, prohibition of firearms for civilians is irrelevant if they’re “real” cops.

    But, if they were rent-a-cops or campus-hired security, any such prohibition might extend to them as well.

    Last year I attended George Mason University, and I recall campus police carrying the full regalia: firearms, billies, pepper spray, cuffs, etc. If these were campus police at UCLA, I wouldn’t necessarily say anything either way as to whether they were carrying firearms, especially given that it’s a public university.

    (On the other hand, if you’re wondering, I think the GMU campus pigs were somehow affiliated with Fairfax PD, so who knows? I think the campus police more or less functioned as a specific arm or special squad of Fairfax police. So, it’s probably irrelevant as pertains UCLA campus security.)

  4. Justin November 19, 2006 at 1:45 am #

    I just ran across this:

    Campus Police are subject to all the same rules and regulations as California police. That’s because they are California Police: “The officers of the department are armed and possess the same authority under the law as municipal police officers.”

    Copied from:


  5. T.J. Van Wyk November 19, 2006 at 11:20 am #

    Not terribly surprising.

    I do find the concept of applying “rules and regulations” to the behavior of cops to be a bit laughable, naturally.

    “Here are all the guns, tasers, truncheons and implements of destruction; now limit thyselves!”

  6. Brian Burtt November 19, 2006 at 3:33 pm #

    Question from a lurker:

    In response to an article that addresses both Friedman and state brutality, I wonder what you think of either the accuracy or implications of this article:

    (Scroll down past their fundraising…)

Leave a Reply

Powered by WordPress. Designed by WooThemes