Monthly Archive for December, 2008

Source of Rights

Published
by
Stefan Claypool
on December 31, 2008
in Politics
. Closed
The more I think about it, the more I believe that the difference between conservatives and liberals is a difference in understanding the origins of the rights of man. The conservative view of the Bill of Rights is that it is designed to protect the preexisting inalienable rights of man. It was also the position of the Founding Fathers that all men are endowed “with certain unalienable Rights,” and that “among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” Conservatives view rights as something that cannot be taken away from an individual, and that no matter what the ruling government says, the rights remain the same. Governments cannot eliminate rights if rights are inalienable; they can merely repress them and deny them.
Liberals on the other hand seem to believe that rather than protecting our rights, the Constitution grants them. They seem to believe that if the government were to, say, repeal the First Amendment, we would lose our right to free speech. In the same situation, conservatives would say that our right to free speech was being denied. I believe that this comes from the liberals’ dim view of humanity. They deny that we could possibly be endowed with natural rights. Because they deny natural rights, they believe that government acts as the final arbitrator of individual rights. This is why they turn to the government to solve their problems, because they believe that since the government has granted them rights, then naturally it is the only entity capable of properly overcoming humanity’s challenges.

This discrepancy in the view of the origin of rights is in my opinion the primary difference between the conservative and liberal philosophies, and continues to drive political debate around the world.

Batman: Too Scary?

Published
by
Stefan Claypool
on December 29, 2008
in Media
. Closed

Sean Avery Is a Joke of a Human Being

Published
by
Stefan Claypool
on December 29, 2008
in Media
. Closed

sean_averyTake a gander at that fellow to the right. Who is he? French fashion model? German modern artist? The new face of Calvin Klein? No, that’s Sean Avery, hockey player. Doesn’t quite look the part? Well, that makes a good deal of sense. Avery doesn’t act like a regular NHL player. That would be beneath a self-proclaimed “fashionhorse” like him.

Avery achieved a measure of fame recently over comments about ex-girlfriends dating other hockey players. Suspended for six games, he returned to the Dallas Stars only to find that his teammates didn’t want him around anymore. He’s currently being locked out of the League by an organization that would rather pay him money to sit at home than have him put on a Stars jersey and pretend to represent them. Unreasonable? Not when we’re talking about Sean Avery.

Avery is notable for being the namesake of “The Avery Rule.” During a Stanley Cup Playoffs game last season, Avery decided that his time would be best spent standing two feet away from goaltender Martin Brodeur, facing him, and waving his arms and stick wildly in an attempted distraction right out of an epileptic disco. Officials were stunned. Players were embarrassed. The following day, NHL management issued a statement ruling that Avery’s behavior was punishable under the League’s definition of unsportsmanlike conduct, perhaps in an attempt to protect him from making an ass of himself in the future.

Don Cherry described Avery thusly: “I’ve known this kid since he was about 16 years old; once a jerk, always a jerk.” Truer words may never have been spoken, and Avery continues to make a joke of himself around the League. His aspiration, it seems, is to turn the NHL into the sort of sideshow that the NBA has long since become – one where colorful personalities and a degernate culture supercede sportsmanship and quality play. Keep in mind that the NHL is the only major sports league in the United States to present an annual award for sportsmanship and gentlemanly conduct – the Lady Byng Memorial Trophy. Sportsmanship is an integral part of the NHL’s identity, and extends throughout the hockey world. One of the greatest joys I found in playing hockey for several years was that it is in many ways designed to breed character in its players. Clearly, there are exceptions to this rule, including Sean Avery.

Sean Avery does not understand that the NHL is not his own personal sideshow, nor does he seem to comprehend that there is no place in professional hockey for the sort of antics that fly in the NBA and the NFL. He is now right where he should be – off the ice and away from the game, with no team rushing to pick him up. He is an embarrassment to hockey. Sean Avery is a joke of a human being. Tell your friends.

Victims

Published
by
Stefan Claypool
on December 19, 2008
in Politics
. Closed
It never ceases to amaze me how otherwise pleasant and intellectually gifted students completely lose their senses when the subject of economics arises. On one recent occasion, a student expressed outrage at the school’s policy of not hiring new staff members and even *gasp* laying off employees during the economic crisis. Never mind that conditions don’t warrant new hires, the argument went: it’s the right of these people to be employed by the college! With a look of satisfaction, this student proudly declared that because of the way the administration has treated these employees, she was confident that no member of the senior class would ever contribute money to Middlebury College.

After I picked my jaw up off the floor, I began to wonder why such an intelligent, generally pleasant individual would make such an outlandish assumption. The reasons, I’ve concluded, are two: first, there is a general inclination among people of my generation to view themselves as victims. Partially because of the Clintonian model of society that came to dominate our country during the 1990s – that is, the do-what-feels-good-and-damn-the-consequences model of society – and partially because of the general lack of national purpose that has defined American life since the end of the Cold War, young people today grow up absent a true sense of responsibility. In their isolated worlds of self-righteous self-indulgence, they deny the very concept of cause and effect, leading them to abandon the idea of consequences altogether. Therefore they are incapable of understanding why the economic challenges facing the school force it to change its policies and lay off nonessential personnel. The layoffs are without motive in their eyes because they do not understand the concept of cause.

The second reason is that the study of economics has been so denigrated among people of my generation that simple concepts like scarcity, supply and demand, and even the most basic ideas concerning business successes and failures are considered far too abstract to be worthy attention. In our rush to embrace the vague umbrella of “cultural studies,” we have neglected economics to the point where the vast majority of students see it as just “fake math,” not understanding the wealth of philosophical and sociological concepts that make up its core.These students do not understand that economics is a system of thought, and that mathematics is just a method through which the tangible results of economic theories are demonstrated. If more attention were paid to the field, there would be far less confusion among young people about the concepts of cause and effect. Furthermore, there would generally be a more thorough understanding of the way society works in practice rather than in the abstract. But instead of devoting any attention to economics, most students scoff at it as they make their way to their classes on closeted homosexual poets of the Byzantine Empire.

Because of their inability to grasp these concepts, most students do not understand the way entities operate in the real world. In addition, they don’t see that when faced with challenges beyond their control, institutions must find ways to fight back that don’t jibe with the vaguely defined socialist utopia that these students want to live in. Basic laws of economics be damned, they say! There is a fundamental injustice being done here! People are being deprived of their right to that job, and it’s the fault of the cruel private college! Well, that college will never get a cent of my money, and I bet that since everyone else shares my indignity, the college will never get a cent of any of our money! How’s it going to keep operating?

Well, I’m sure the Government can help!

Young people don’t understand that a business such as a private college must look after its own interests. And if upon graduation students choose not to give back to the school, that is their decision. But to view themselves as victims of the school is simply ludicrous, and I am disgusted that individuals who have been given such wonderful educational opportunities by Middlebury College are too self-absorbed and ignorant to appreciate it.