Source: Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression
by Sarah McLaughlin
“Among social media commenters, columnists, and even heads of state, it’s a typical refrain: If we just rid ourselves of that pesky internet anonymity and pseudonymity, we will have a cleaner, better, happier world. Anonymity, the common sentiment goes, is the weapon of the evil and the cruel. Despite some prevalent misconceptions, anonymity is not an invention of social media, email, or the internet age. The American founding fathers, for example, took great advantage of pseudonymous and anonymous expression, as have denizens of Rome for hundreds of years on the city’s ‘talking statues.’ Opposition to anonymity is not new either — far from it. … Anonymity and pseudonymity are not weapons trained upon the vulnerable. Rather, anonymity is the protector of the vulnerable, the shield between them and consequences ranging from embarrassment to social fallout to the worst forms of government oppression.” (06/26/26)
“The Trump administration is right to defend the MOU as necessary and good. But it is good because it ends the war instead of allowing it to continue on its increasingly damaging path. They are wrong to defend it as an improvement over the JCPOA or even the deal that was on the table before the U.S. and Israel attacked this February. The Islamic Republic, liberated from maximum pressure sanctions and having demonstrated its ability to close the Strait of Hormuz and withstand major attacks, will be in a stronger position than perhaps ever before. A final agreement should be signed; the war should never have been fought.” (06/27/26)
“I’ve got mixed opinions on voting itself (for one thing, I’m not sure it accomplishes much), and strong opinions on mail (the government should get entirely out of the matter and let the private sector handle it), but this particular matter is about rule of law. Regardless of whether I like the laws, or how they’re made, or who gets to make them, I’m a big supporter of holding the government and its officials TO the laws they claim are so important for OUR ‘protection.'” (06/28/26)
“Garment factories do not conscript workers when they open in Dhaka, Bangladesh, or Jakarta, Indonesia. Many would-be workers walk for hours, lie about their age, and bribe their way into getting jobs. That is not victimhood. That is how people behave when they’ve found an opportunity to improve their lives. The U.N. panjandrums never consider the alternatives to low-wage factory work in poverty-ridden countries. The reality is brutal: subsistence farming at the mercy of monsoon season, scavenging, informal day labor, and even prostitution.” (06/27/26)
Source: Future of Freedom Foundation
by Jacob G Hornberger
“The increasing popularity of democratic socialism is causing the American right-wing, as well as many libertarians, to go bananas. After the Mamdani candidates won, President Trump declared, ‘America the beautiful will NEVER be a Communist Country!!!’ At the same time, some rightwing commentators and libertarian commentators are feverishly reminding people of the millions of people who have died as a result of socialism and communism. I find all of this fierce reaction among both conservatives and libertarians to the soaring popularity of socialism, especially among young people, to be quite amusing. Why? Because right-wingers and a very large percentage of libertarians are among the fiercest supporters of socialist programs that one could ever find … but with one caveat: No one is permitted to refer to such socialist programs as ‘socialism.'” (06/26/26)
“Science fiction author Arthur C. Clarke wrote in 1977: ‘The impact of telecommunications satellites on the entire human race will be at least the same impact as the advent of the telephone in so-called developed societies.’ Today, that prediction has long been reality. Few people realize how deeply daily life already depends on space infrastructure. If all satellites suddenly failed, navigation systems would collapse. Smartphones and vehicles could no longer determine location accurately. Weather forecasts would become unavailable. Airports would descend into chaos without GPS-based time and positioning data. Traffic signals would desynchronize, leading to chaos on the roads. Supply chains that depend on satellite-supported logistics would disintegrate. Even financial transactions would grind to a halt, as precise time signals via satellites are vital for synchronizing debits and credits.” (06/27/26)
“Yes, yes, we know, paying tax is the price of partaking in civilisation. But that’s still a price, a cost. We think that people should see, up close and personal, the cost of that civilisation being built on their money. We are therefore against this: ‘Income tax will be automatically deducted from state pensions for millions of retirees under plans being considered by Labour, The Telegraph understands.’ Not because the state pension should, or should not, be taxed. But because this is easy taxation. Some to many will not really even note it. Tax should be painful so that proper consideration be given to how much is being demanded.” (06/27/26)
“‘You’re next!’ This chant, at the victory celebration of the Democratic Socialists this week, was a message not for the oligarchs or the billionaires, but for House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) and the Democratic establishment. They were threatening that Jeffries would be the next to lose his House seat to a socialist candidate. It was a scene that has recurred throughout history, as establishment leaders are overtaken by the very mobs they sought to use for their own purposes.” (06/27/26)
“Now that the United States and Iran have signed a nonbinding memorandum of understanding ending their war (at least for now) the general public and pundits have been weighing in on who won. A CBS-YouGov survey released Sunday found that 37% of Americans think the memorandum of understanding (MOU) favors Iran, while 22% believe the United States got the better deal. Nearly half (47%) say both sides broke even. Newsweek, meanwhile, queried 10 military experts ranging from a former US Navy admiral and a former Pentagon official to five think tank scholars and two professors of international relations. Seven said Iran won the war. Two said ‘no one’. Only one thought the United States came out on top, but added, ‘Neither side will gain a complete victory.'” (06/27/26)
“Most, if not all, libertarians know the parable of the wolves and the sheep: what Hawai’i did was that very thing: supposedly, a majority of Hawaiians don’t want to be around guns. And therefore, elected a majority of conscript parents (senators) and people’s representatives that also don’t like to have guns around, either. In a democracy, anything is theoretically possible if a majority votes for it. Even if that majority, for example, consists of 5,000,001 out of 10,000,000 voters. (And since there are no quorums for voting, and so many people either don’t vote or have their votes ignored, that ten million voters would be ‘served democratically’ if only 10% of the voters turned out and the vote was 500,001 to 499,999.) The wolves (well, voters) get to enjoy their choice: veal Parmasan or veal stew, but the sheep are dead and eaten regardless.” (06/27/26)
