J. H. Huebert

"I gotta have more cowbell!"

2003-08-29T23:04:00.000-04:00

More cowbell.

SAN CRISTOBAL DE LAS CASAS, CHIAPAS, MEXICO -- I am writing now from an internet cafe above club Revolucion in San Cristobal. As far as I can tell, the music being played in the club below is a recording... except for the cowbell, which is definitely live. Guess that goes to show you, you just can't get enough cowbell!

As I type this, fully live music has started... kind of a light latin jazz. Maybe I'll go down and check it out. I mean, with a cowbell like that, who'd want to miss it?

You all are invited.

2004-08-03T12:50:00.000-04:00

You all are invited.

A selection of my photographic work will be on display in the gallery at the Chicago Photography Center beginning this coming Sunday, August 8th.

I will be there in person for the opening reception from 12:00 noon to 4:00 p.m.

Chicago-area readers as well as out-of-towners are welcome to attend the show's reception then, see the photos, and say hello.

And for all of you art aficionados who like a little sustenance with your gallery visits, there will be lots of food, soft drinks, wine, and the like, all on the house.

See you this Sunday at the reception!

The Chicago Photography Center is located at 3301 North Lincoln Avenue, and parking is free all day Sunday.

ARTIST INFORMATION

J. H. Huebert was inspired to become a photographer during his travels to various venues across North America, as well as Central and South America, and England. He first studied black and white photography in depth under a private tutor, Craig "Cisco" Dietz, in San Cristobal de las Casas, Chiapas, Mexico. He became associated with the Chicago Photography Center in 2002, while earning his Juris Doctor degree at the University of Chicago Law School. In addition to black and white photography, Mr. Huebert has taken CPC courses in close-up photography, flash photography, and Polaroid transfer techniques.

Mr. Huebert’s work focuses primarily on black and white environmental portraits of the indigenous peoples of Guatemala, Peru, and Mexico, in addition to landscapes and pre-Columbian architecture in those areas. One of his most vibrant color photos, "Mayan Weave," was featured on the cover of Mosaic, Spring 2004, and he is presently working on a one-year private project for the permanent collection of The Smithsonian. He mainly works in 35 mm format (Nikon N80), and does some medium format photography for fun with a Holga that was given to him by the Museum of Contemporary Photography.

While continuing his photographic work, Mr. Huebert will also begin full-time employment this fall as a law clerk for a judge of the United States Court of Appeals.

Wow.

2004-08-02T12:50:00.000-04:00

Wow.

The Mises Institute amazes again and again by coming up with new and better ways to make as much material as possible on Austrian economics and liberty available to the entire world.

Go to Mises.org and you can watch this week's Mises University live in astonishingly clear streaming video.

What a benefit this will be to the world, in more ways than anyone could possibly know at this time.

Yes, it's that bad.

2004-08-01T23:39:00.000-04:00

Yes, it's that bad.

I'm referring, of course, to The Village, M. Night Shyamalan's much maligned -- but, as it turns out, not enough maligned -- new movie.

I thought about ranting at length about every detail of this idiotic movie, but Roger Ebert has said it well enough, and I really don't feel like revisiting the unpleasant experience that was The Village now that it's over.

Perhaps, like me, you enjoyed the earlier Shyamalan films despite any faults they may have had, and are curious as to just how obvious the movie's twist is. Perhaps you think a movie with the talents of William Hurt, Adrien Brody, and Sigourney Weaver could not be entirely bad, and must have some redeeming value. I understand these feelings, but I urge you to just trust me on this one. If you want a brief spoiler-filled synopsis, let me know, and I'll give it to you, and you will then thank me for sparing you eight dollars and two agonizing hours. Just don't give Shyamalan your money for this garbage.

Shyamalan is a talented director, and that is evident even when he's working with the atrocious script here. He needs to stop writing the stories for his films, and stop relying on gimmick endings if he wants build a reputation as a great filmmaker.

The only redeeming part of my moviegoing experience was when the film burned apart, causing a delay of about 15 minutes, which meant we all got free passes, which I can now use to go see a better movie.

The Manchurian Candidate disappoints.

2004-07-31T17:55:00.000-04:00

The Manchurian Candidate is a blown opportunity.

I should have known better than to listen to Frank Rich.

His comments before the release of the new remake of The Manchurian Candidate led me to hope that it would be a timely statement about how certain individuals and corporations have in interest in perpetuating an unending “war on terror” to increase their own power and line their own pockets.

And I suppose, now that I have seen it, that there was some of that.

Unfortunately, that message, if it was intended at all, was so wrapped up in so many absurd X-Files style sci-fi plot devices that it might lead audiences to be more ready to dismiss any legitimate “conspiracy theories” about the military-industrial complex than they otherwise would have been.

What’s scarier than anything in the movie (which, despite its incredibility, is still quite creepy) is that the Cheneys and Halliburtons of the world have gotten where they are without having to put a chip in anyone’s brain. What’s genuinely scary is how the moronic public has been “brainwashed” more effectively than Denzel Washington by decades of government schooling and a state-worshipping media. But The Manchurian Candidate isn’t interested in any of that.

Still, any movie in which all of the bad guys are politicians or in bed with the government can’t be all bad. But if you want to see a thought-provoking movie about conspiracies and state manipulation of the public, rent Wag the Dog. The Manchurian Candidate is strictly for entertainment purposes.

Next up: The Village. Can it be as bad as Roger Ebert says? Probably.

Movie bits.

2004-07-23T01:58:00.000-04:00

Movie bits.

Sad to see (via Ryan McMaken) that film composer Jerry Goldsmith has died. His score for the otherwise-mediocre Star Trek: The Motion Picture is wonderful.

Did you know that, like some of the great films of old, the first Star Trek has an overture, of several minutes of music over a black screen before it starts? It's one of the great scores, and Goldsmith deserved the screen time to himself.

***

Speaking of Star Trek (which I seem to be doing an awful lot lately, considering that I haven't seen an episode of the show in years), it appears that William Shatner will soon be returning as Captain James T. Kirk.

I have never watched the current Trek TV show, Enterprise, except for the first fifteen minutes of the pilot, which told me everything I needed to know. As far as I can tell, between that show and the last dreadful movie, Star Trek is beyond over, played out, milked to death and then some, etc. But anything they do with my favorite fictional character will be a more fitting sendoff than his disgraceful death scene in Star Trek: Generations, and should be a nice last hurrah before the franchise's impending demise.

***

Like sensible people everywhere, I thought the idea of remaking The Manchurian Candidate was atrocious. It sounds, however, like they may have done a great job of making it a most timely and appropriate anti-state film, according to Drudge.

Could it be? I'll actually pay to see the hideous Meryl Streep? First Michael Moore, now this? The things the Bush Adminstration makes me do...

Michael Moore makes me sick.

2004-07-08T03:58:00.000-04:00

Michael Moore makes me sick.

In my mostly-favorable review of Fahrenheit 9/11, I predicted that Michael Moore's next film would likely be "something like an attack on the alleged evils of Wal-Mart."

Now alert reader Tyler Cruise writes to inform me that Moore's next project is tentatively titled Sicko, and will be an expose of the U.S. healthcare system.

With the success of 9/11, Moore will have the whole country's full attention for his socialist propaganda, which will no doubt be highly persuasive to the ignorant massman whose only economic knowledge is that it costs him a whole lot to pay for health insurance.

No matter how great Fahrenheit 9/11 may be, I'm not sure I will consider it to have been worthwhile, on the whole, when John Kerry is president, we are still in Iraq, and we have socialized medicine.

More valid criticisms of Fahrenheit 9/11.

2004-06-30T00:32:00.000-04:00

More valid criticisms of Fahrenheit 9/11.

I see now that Antiwar.com's Justin Raimondo has posted some criticisms of his own of Fahrenheit 9/11, which are different from the ones I have made.

Raimondo raises good points. The sequence of photos of Bush administration people merely shaking hands with Saudi after Saudi was not persuasive. These photos prove nothing, because presumably any president's administration is going to meet with these people a lot. And certainly if anyone on the right had created such a montage to make any point the film would be condemned and perhaps even kept out of theaters because of its "racism."

Nonetheless, I continue to recommend the film highly... as long as you also read Raimondo and me.

I loved Fahrenheit 9/11.

2004-06-28T01:52:00.000-04:00

I loved Fahrenheit 9/11.

With some reservations.

Hillsdale College declines, but Grove City College...

2004-06-18T12:32:00.000-04:00

Hillsdale College declines, but Grove City College still worthwhile.

Thomas DiLorenzo observes that Hillsdale College is being (has been?) lost to neoconservative Lincoln and Churchill worshippers.

Thus, as he adds, my alma mater, Grove City College, is the best place to go for "high quality and genuinely private education."

I agree, of course. GCC has a stellar economics program, which includes Austrian scholars Jeffrey Herbener and Shawn Ritenour, and seems to get better all the time. Certainly the new Austrian Student Scholars Conference is something of which the school should be extremely proud.

I was most disappointed, however, to see the school's latest Vision and Values publication (which is sort of like Hillsdale's Imprimis, but not as widely circulated), which featured a transcript of a warmongering talk by Mona Charen on "Useful Idiots" who question Bush's war plans in any way. And they even had Karl Rove on campus as a speaker a while back. Disturbing stuff.

Nonetheless, if you want an excellent educational environment (e.g., no on-campus alcohol, sex, homosexuality, etc.) and want to study Austrian economics, I can think of nowhere that I would recommend more highly.

Beltway libertarians love Reagan.

2004-06-10T22:59:00.000-04:00

Beltway libertarians love Reagan.

So-called libertarians who make their living in, or who just really like, Washington DC are showing their true colors upon the death of Ronald Reagan.

Here's David Boaz on "the most eloquent spokesman for limited government of our time." Sure, he admits, Reagan may have actually made government bigger, but on the other hand, Ron and Nancy "were the first White House occupants to have hosted a gay couple overnight."

There's much more fawning from folks at the Cato Institute here.

Virginia Postrel, who lives in Texas but is an honorary "Beltway Libertarian" nonetheless, writes a love letter, too. As usual, she thinks everything in the whole world is getting better and better every day. And much of it is thanks to Reagan: "Amazingly, [Reagan's] prescriptions worked. The economy got worse at first--much, much worse, so bad Reagan himself called it a depression. But he stayed the course, and helped Paul Volcker stay it. The economy got better, and stayed better--mostly good and sometimes even great, except for a few short bumps--for decades." A few short bumps? I can think of at least two long ones named George Bush. And how is raising taxes after you lower them staying the course? But I digress...

Reason magazine editor Nick Gillespie like's Postrel's tribute, but also admits that Murray Rothbard effectively debunked Reaganomics. Rothbard loses points, though, for quoting Gilbert & Sullivan which apparently is not hip enough for Reason.

Somewhat surprisingly, Alex Tabarrok writes: "In foreign policy of course, Reagan saw further than anyone else. Only Reagan predicted that communism would end up on the dustbin of history and at critical moments he took the actions necessary to make it happen." This is a bizarre claim, given that Mises foresaw communism's certain failure about 60 years earlier, and that this collapse would have happened even if Reagan had done nothing at all.
Anyway, there's a taste of what they're saying in some circles where the word "libertarian" is sometimes used.

Marijuana: friend of law and order.

2004-06-11T00:20:00.000-04:00

Marijuana: friend of law and order.

Officials in Portugal have a great idea: let would-be soccer hooligans smoke pot. Funny how it's taken cops this long to realize that if you let people commit victimless crimes, that's time they won't spend commiting violent ones. And in this case, it makes them less inclined to be violent at all.

Now, in honor of Jimmy Kimmel (and Karen De Coster), I recommend that the Detroit police seize upon this fine idea, and legalize pot at least until the NBA finals are over. Better to burn a joint than burn the city.

Better ban Mary Poppins.

2004-06-10T14:35:00.000-04:00

Better ban Mary Poppins.

In China, anyway. From South Africa's Independent:

Hong Kong - A film fan ended up in hospital after trying to imitate Mary Poppins by leaping out of his second floor apartment window holding an umbrella, a news report said on Thursday.

The man, from Chongqing, western China, found that unlike in the Disney film the umbrella did not help him fly and he landed heavily, the South China Morning Post reported.

He later told police he decided to try the stunt because he feared his microwave oven was about to explode.

Of course, banning Mary Poppins would make about as much sense as banning Song of the South.

Paying the devil his due.

2004-06-08T00:49:00.000-04:00

Paying the devil his due.

It's interesting to see folks at the LRC Blog disagree over whether Reagan was a good guy or a bad guy.

I'm inclined to agree with Marcus Epstein who says that Reagan's "heart was in the right place." Epstein points out Reagan's name-checking of Mises, Hazlitt, and Bastiat in a 1975 Reason interview. We can be fairly certain that these were not just names Reagan was fed by an advisor who knew that Reason readers would be thrilled by it. I recall that the library at FEE has (or had, last time I looked) a letter on display from Reagan congratulating Hazlitt on his 90th birthday. And of course, the New York Post's front page once depicted Reagan on a plane reading The Freeman. Also, Reagan sent condolences to FEE upon Leonard Read's passing.

I can think of no political purpose that Reagan could have had in doing any of that, so it seems likely to me that he was, to some extent, a sincere student of the free market.

On the other hand, in this life, good intentions count for nothing at all. Neither does "trying" to do the right thing. Only actions and results count. And when we look at Reagan's actions, and their results, his legacy is nothing to be proud of, and has led us down the road to ever more government oppression.

Surely a person who says the right things and perpetrates evil is more dangerous than someone who is openly on the wrong side. This is why we must renounce Reagan. To do anything less would be to support the statist cause, and essentially add our voices to those of the people who say, "Even Reagan supported social security," "Even Reagan supported the U.N.," and so forth.

For similar reasons, it is important that we not soften our stance toward Reagan at the time of his death. Jeffrey Tucker has pointed out the similarity between the media’s fawning over Reagan and the emperor worship of Rome. This evening, I was pleased to hear the sometimes-vile, sometimes-great radio host Michael Savage refuse to join in the chorus of Reagan worship for this very reason--i.e., because political leaders do not deserve this kind of excessive praise and attention, no matter how good they may have been. He quite rightly compared this to the sort of compulsory mourning for dead leaders that occurred in the Soviet Union, and noted that the media’s weeklong Reaganfest moves us one step closer to this kind of leader worship.

Even if we are as charitable as possible to Reagan regarding where his heart was, we must consider his presidency an example of why even people with the best of intentions should not be given the kind of power that an American president has--and why libertarians should never become too enthusiastic about anyone who reaches that office.

UPDATE: It is not surprising at all to see that Rothbard said it all about Reagan, first and best, years ago.

Queer decision.

2004-06-05T23:13:00.000-04:00

Queer decision.

Forgive me for stating the obvious, but alleging that a heterosexual is a homosexual is defamation, regardless of what any activist judge who does not live in reality says.

Whether that or any defamation should create legal liability is, of course, a different question.

Thank you, Ronald Reagan!

2004-06-05T23:22:00.000-04:00

Thank you, Ronald Reagan!

On the occasion of his death, I would like to thank former president Ronald Reagan for all he did for the cause of freedom in the United States and around the world.

Thank you, Ronald Reagan, for eliminating the national debt, so that we, our children, and our grandchildren will not have to be taxed someday to pay it off!

Thank you, Ronald Reagan, for saving social security!

Thank you, Ronald Reagan, for not supporting any evil dictators like Saddam Hussein!

Thank you, Ronald Reagan, for bringing down "big government"!

Thank you, Ronald Reagan, for opposing tax increases!

Thank you, Ronald Reagan, for only appointing conservative judges, who strictly adhere to the text of the constitution!

Thank you, Ronald Reagan, for filling the world with nuclear weapons, which keep us safe from people with nuclear weapons!

And thank you most of all for using the rhetoric of liberty and religion so much and so well, so we know that no matter how obscenely offensive anything you have done may seem, we know it really must be okay!

(Note to readers: feel free to send in more suggestions of things for which we should thank the Gipper. The above are just a few off the top of my head.)

That deserves a medal.

2004-06-03T18:33:00.000-04:00

That deserves a medal.

Via Eugene Volokh, whom I suspect has a rather different attitude toward the matter:

The . . . [Spanish] Defence Minister handed back a medal he was given for his role in withdrawing troops from Iraq, it emerged Wednesday.

José Bono sent a letter to the prime minister José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero saying he would give back the Cross of Military Merit, according to sources close to the minister.

The move comes after Bono was heavily criticised when he was given the award last week.

It was awarded by Zapatero for Bono's "merits" as a minister, including his role in the withdrawal of Spanish troops from Iraq.

But Opposition political figures said Bono should not have received the award only six weeks after taking over as Defence Minister.

Zapatero granted the award to all those who helped in the withdrawal of Spanish troops from Iraq. . . .

The only problem with this story that I can see is that Bono gave it back.

I was a merchant of death!

2004-06-05T04:54:00.000-04:00

I was a merchant of death!

But my conscience isn't bothered. Read the details at LewRockwell.com.

War, politics, and other anti-libertarian activiti...

2004-06-01T18:00:00.000-04:00

War, politics, and other anti-libertarian activities.

Will Baude is right to think that the Libertarian Party isn't a good vehicle for advancing liberty.

Instead, unfortunately, he wants someone to produce libertarian scorecards grading members of Congress. These lists would announce "how closely [Congressmen] hewed to libertarian orthodoxy (on those things-- unlike, say, war-- where such an orthodoxy exists)."

Of course there is an "orthodox" libertarian view on war: you can't aggress against innocent people, even if you call it a war, and even if you kill some alleged bad guys in the process.

It should be obvious now, if it wasn't before, that the state poses its biggest threat to freedom at home and abroad when it is at war. This is not simply a libertarian issue, it is one of the most important libertarian issues, if not the most important issue, because only through a nuclear war could the state possibly destroy all life on earth and with it all prospects for human freedom in the future.

Being prohibited from smoking pot is a trivial offense compared to being annihiliated.

For further details, I recommend Murray N. Rothbard's essay, "War, Peace, and the State," and of course the entire book, The Costs of War.

As for the idea of producing a scorecard, with or without war on it, I don't really see a point. Even if you can identify a group of guys who are slightly better than the others on some issues that are important to you, and even if they win, little or no good will come of it. (See, for example, the so-called Republican revolution of the 1990's.)

Democracy is inherently hopeless, and pinning hopes on politicians--Republican, Democrat, or Libertarian--is a waste of time and effort.

The Real Mill

2004-05-31T14:52:00.000-04:00

The Real Mill.

Karen De Coster rightly notes that John Stuart Mill is no friend of libertarianism.

So many people who are perceived as libertarians, but are not at all, such as Richard Posner and other Chicago types, refer to the non-agression axiom as the "Mill principle," as though Mill came up with the idea, or provided the best case for it. It just ain't so.

Of course, the real story on Mill is that he was a socialist, and he became a socialist because he allowed himself to be led around by the nose by a Mrs. Taylor. Sadly, allowing a woman to control one's life in this way has been the downfall of many a great man. (A fact we here at jhhuebert.com keep in mind at all times.)

On the other hand, it seems to be working out okay for John Kerry.

The place for right thinking people.

2004-05-24T00:20:00.000-04:00

The place for right thinking people.

Now that I've been there and told the world, it appears that all manner of right thinking people are flocking to the Riviera Maya, south of Cancun, for fun in the sun.

Karen De Coster files two reports from Playa del Carmen, and Taki reports on the sort of affair that many people can only experience vicariously.

Boring Reads?

2004-05-24T00:46:00.000-04:00

Boring Reads?

Stephan Kinsella says that he finds the little hardback books written by the late Leonard E. Read "boring," and adds that they "have sat on my shelf for over a decade now, collecting dust."

To some extent, I know what he means, because I have a collection of Read books just like it, including probably 10 or so that I have not read and might well never read.

But let us not dismiss all of this man's written work so quickly.

While some of those book titles may be, as Kinsella says, "meaningless," Read wrote two books relatively early in his writing career whose titles describe their contents precisely: Anything That's Peaceful and Elements of Libertarian Leadership. These two books respectively present Read's ideas on the ideology and methodology of libertarianism.

Anything That's Peaceful stated the basic libertarian idea, and described its application, in a clear and simple way, as few had done before. Elements, though it may contain some dubious theology, has important ideas on why trying to convert the mass man is not a good means of advancing liberty. It and "Isaiah's Job," by Albert Jay Nock, provided the ideas that motivated me to write my own material on more recent "excitement" at FEE.

By the way, Read reportedly took Elements of Libertarian Leadership out of print after he decided he didn't like the word "libertarian" anymore. One reason he may have disliked the word is because it had come to be used by anarchocapitalists like Rothbard. Read was firmly in the "limited government" camp, as one can see in another early, more focused book that he wrote, called Government: An Ideal Concept (!).

The other books that Read wrote in later years were generally less focused, and contained various short meditations on life and liberty. Without question, these things' marginal value is pretty small after you've read his earlier stuff. Read wrote them, I think, to refine his own thinking, and because the more stuff he put out there, the greater the likelihood that someone, somewhere would find it, and would find it useful.

Kinsella also mentions Rose Wilder Lane's Discovery of Freedom as another book he can't bring himself to finish. This one, too, sits on my shelf with a bookmark in it, about one third of the way through, where it has remained for maybe five years. I much prefer Henry Grady Weaver's reworking of the same material, The Mainspring of Human Progress.

Worst decision ever?

2004-05-24T00:11:00.000-04:00

Worst decision ever?

Roe v. Wade? Lawrence v. Texas? There are many contenders.

Paul Craig Roberts is pretty convincing, however, in making the case for (or rather against) the awful Brown v. Board of Education:

Brown Myths Live in Law School

"The Brown decision rests on Gunnar Myrdal’s book, An American Dilemma. Tomorrow’s decision may come from lyrics to a rap song or from a legal decision in a South African or a French court."

Meanwhile, some folks over at the Volokh Conspiracy can't quite handle the less-than-PC line Roberts takes.

Alert readers may recall that one of my correspondents nailed this some time ago.

Now online: The Block-Epstein debate! The dynam...

2004-05-17T22:45:00.000-04:00

Now online: The Block-Epstein debate!

The dynamic debate between Walter Block and Richard Epstein, held last Monday at the University of Chicago Law School, is now in the archives at Mises Media.

Hear these two giants of libertarianism in a feisty dispute on the issue: "Do we really need eminent domain?"

Here's the direct link to the mp3 audio:

Walter Block and Richard Epstein, "Do We Really Need Eminent Domain?"

Your feedback on this debate would be appreciated.

Suddenly, I wish I subscribed to Reason.

2004-05-14T03:14:00.000-04:00

Suddenly, I wish I subscribed to Reason.

I don't like the quasi-libertarian Reason magazine quite enough to subscribe to it, but I do like it enough to pick it up when I see on the stand at Borders. This is somewhat paradoxical, I'll admit, since it's costing me more to buy it off the shelf pretty much every month than it would to subscribe. I'd like to think I'm making a statement of some sort, but I'll have to get back to you on exactly what that statement is.

At any rate, this is cool. My compliments to them on a most innovative idea.