Airstrip One

Around the Web

An old Free Life Commentary from Sean Gabb is interesting. It's on Israel and what the West should do. However this paragraph says it best - if not on Israel then on foreign affairs in general:

In general, I think the world would be a less violent place if it mainly consisted of nation states, each acting to preserve its own borders and other narrowly defined interests. This would give a predictability to international relations of the sort that existed in Europe between 1648 and 1914 - a period in which, with the arguable exception of those against the French Revolution, hugely destructive wars were avoided. The problem with moralistic crusades for democracy or human rights, or whatever, is that they involve unpredictable actions in support of often unachievable ends. The natural result is unlimited national or ideological hatreds that lead to permanent instability.

I tend to disagree with Dr Gabb on the interest in fighting to preserve closely linked cultures, but it is a very good article nonetheless.

Something New

And this from Steve Sailer's site on Russia's long term interests. Its easier to read here.

Islam Bashing

A bit of Islam bashing from the National Review. Before you assume that I'm tut-tutting, I broadly agree with Berlusconni on the relative merits of Islam and the West, I just think that the most effective way is for the Muslims to find this out for themselves. I do tend, however to agree with Jared Taylor that the Islamic world does not hate us because we are better, but because of what we are doing in their sphere of influence. (I do not agree with Jared's Taylors main sweep of civilised racism, however).

There's an interesting piece on the value of dissent, particularly Ron Paul's missed oportunity, here.

Another article from the Independence Institute, on the close link between the Second World War and Keynesianism.