catallaxy files

catallaxy in technical exile

Around the blogs, Tuesday 22

with 39 comments

Nicholas Gruen reviews the NZ Regulatory Responsibility Bill

Anyway, the new government has had a Treasury taskforce working away on the Regulatory Reform Bill and I think I get why its progenitors are thinking of it as a new departure. It is. The reg review part of it is pretty business as usual and IMO won’t achieve anything much – but the Bill is actually a bill of a different sort. It’s a bill of rights, plain and simple. It’s an economic bill of rights – it’s constitutional structure is the same as Victoria’s new Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities which became law on 25 July 2006. But it’s content is a bill of economic rights – essentially for property holders.

Tim Blair reports on the lynching of polar bears in Brisbane. Warning, could upset the children.

Legal Eagle reviews a book on the frustrations of becoming a lawyer

Pryor is exploring a number of questions: what drives young people to want to become lawyers? Why do many lawyers decide it is not worthwhile once they get there? Why do others stay in corporate law jobs even though they hate it? She also looks at bankers and management consultants.

Andrew Norton discusses the diversity of views on the “non-left”.  It helps to read the original piece in The Australian.

Surprisingly large minorities of economic liberals – people choosing the classical liberal, libertarian or economic liberal and social conservative labels – support the interventionist side in contentious industrial relations issues. Nearly half favour minimum wage laws, though a third concede that such laws risk jobs.

This is not all that surprising, though it demonstrates how little the ideas of economic rationalism have spread. This diversity was described a couple of decades ago in the context of the need for the non-left needing to find some coherence after the Fall of the Wall eliminated the major common enemy. My response was to make a plea for social conservatives to do some homework in economics and the economic rationalists to get more attuned to cultural issues.

Hyeractive commentator John J Ray has a whole suite of sites. This is the list, you need to go to the main site to find the links.

John Ray’s “Tongue Tied”

John Ray’s “Dissecting Leftism” 

John Ray’s “Obama Watch” 

John Ray’s “Dissecting Leftism” 

John Ray’s “Australian Politics” 

John Ray’s “Gun Watch” 

 John Ray’s “Education Watch International” 

John Ray’s “Socialized Medicine” 

John Ray’s “Political Correctness Watch” 

John Ray’s “Greenie Watch” 

John Ray’s “Food & Health Skeptic” 

John Ray’s “Eye on Britain” blog 

“Leftists as Elitists” 

Ray’s “Some memoirs”

Advertisements

Written by Rafe

December 21, 2009 at 10:47 pm

Posted in Uncategorized

39 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Surely the Cat is above promoting Jon Ray? He’s an ex-neo-Nazi, and still pushes ‘race science’ nonsense. The blogs above are mostly duplicates of cut-and-paste spam from GOP blogs in the US. The reason there are 127 versions is that, like Mr Bird, Ray thinks the black helicopters will come for him as a result of his subversive blogging.

    THR

    December 21, 2009 at 11:01 pm

  2. Also, going back to this:

    Andrew Norton is looking at the cut in Quadrant funding, from $50K per annum to $35K, clearly a political move given that Overland continues to receive $60K. Best suggestions (1) reduce the size and number of articles in each edition, (2) principled lefties to complain about foul play.

    It may not actually be ‘foul play’ or political in motivation. I’m not sure what the circulation of each journal is, but you’ve got a serious case for overland being vastly more accomplished as regards literary and philosophical/cultural credentials. Quadrant just re-hashes old culture war garbage with tendentious tripe from has-beens and never-weres.

    THR

    December 21, 2009 at 11:09 pm

  3. … what drives young people to want to become lawyers?

    They watch too much television?

    C.L.

    December 21, 2009 at 11:17 pm

  4. This might be more relevant to the open thread, but since CL raised the topic of lawyers, I was reminded of this article in the age today:

    http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/the-chance-to-be-heard-20091220-l7e1.html

    This is the third such article in the Age this week, each arguing (against recent Ombudsman recommendations) that the bureaucracy and legal systems dealing with child protection matters ought to continue to be ‘adversarial’ in nature.

    What none of the articles tell you is that the system is set up to encourage perverse incentives and rent-seeking, since legal reps in the above system are paid per appearance. This gives rise to a whole range of vexatious disputation, pointless adjournments, etc., and it’s all funded directly by the taxpayer.

    THR

    December 21, 2009 at 11:26 pm

  5. What’s the alternative?

    C.L.

    December 21, 2009 at 11:31 pm

  6. You could pay per case, rather than per appearance.

    THR

    December 21, 2009 at 11:36 pm

  7. I don’t know enough about it but there seems to be a prima facie case for looking at the whole thing. But wouldn’t per case payment be difficult to price? Might not lawyers up the omnibus fee you’re suggesting to recover the monies they formerly got anyway?

    C.L.

    December 21, 2009 at 11:39 pm

  8. Maybe. There might be a risk that they would under-service clients on a flat rate, whereas now, they over-service them and milk the court process for every cent. I’m also a bit surprised that the Age has seemingly come out in support of these guys.

    THR

    December 21, 2009 at 11:57 pm

  9. John Ray is not an ex-nazi. He studied neo-nazi organisations as an academic endeavour. He has written extensively about it, been published in peer-reviewed journals on the subject, and is more pro-Israel than anyone on the internet.

    Yobbo

    December 22, 2009 at 12:48 am

  10. John Ray has developed and nourished a persecution complex that blinds him to reality – all he does now is recycle reactionary opinion pieces whilst playing out his unfulfilled James Bond fantasies on the internet.

    rog

    December 22, 2009 at 6:58 am

  11. Referring to John Ray as a nazi or fascist is simply old-fashioned communist agit-propaganda, from sore losers in the battle of ideas.
    Like Quadrant, you actually need to read John Ray to find out what he has to offer.
    He does not have a persecution complex, although of course he is persecuted and denigrated by people who are threatened by his ideas.
    He has accumulated a vast store of information to document the ignorance and perversity of radical lefties and their views.

    Rafe

    December 22, 2009 at 8:12 am

  12. He does Rafe; he believes Google are out to get him.

    He exhibits bias in that he uncritically reproduces opinion pieces that contain no evidence.

    rog

    December 22, 2009 at 8:16 am

  13. Interesting, the accusation that he was a neo-Nazi appears to have been abandoned in favour of pursuing his ‘persecution complex’.

    “He exhibits bias in that he uncritically reproduces opinion pieces that contain no evidence.”

    So far as I know he has never reproduced your opinions, rog, critically or uncritically.

    dover_beach

    December 22, 2009 at 9:03 am

  14. rog, would you like to nominate someone who is free of bias?
    Would you like to make some concrete point that is worthy of discussion?

    Rafe

    December 22, 2009 at 9:05 am

  15. At ClimateAudit, the case of Siberian temps gets more and more curious:

    In the subsequent comments, Lars Kamél reported that his 2004 submission to GRL on Siberian temperatures was almost certainly one of the two articles on Siberia where Jones’ adverse reviews had prevented publication.

    Kamél sent me a copy of the 2004 submission which I’ve placed online here.

    Kamél applied the homogenization technique of Vincent (1998) – used for Canadian station data – to a network of stations in southern Siberia around Lake Baikal (90−130 E; 40−75 N). Kamél reported that in the innermost portion of this region (100−120 E, 50−65 N):

    the number of stations increased from 8 in 1901 to 23 in 1951 and then decreased to 12 from 1989 to present. Only four stations, those at Irkutsk, Bratsk, Chita and Kirensk, cover the entire 20th century.

    Relative to CRU, he found that the trend in his results for the period 1901−2002 was 0.33−0.62 K/century less for calendar year data relative to CRU.

    He speculated that the reason for the difference was that CRU contained “too little correction for urban warming”:

    The reason for the differences, compared to the CRU calculation, is not known, but probably it is because the CRU compilation contains too little correction for urban warming. It is unlikely that the small modifications made to Vincent’s method could have created any non−climate cooling trend. There is at least one further reason to believe that the mean region had a very small warming in this period. There is one “rural” location (< 10,000 inhabitants), Kirensk, that have a record which covers the entire period. This record shows no significant temperature change at all.

    dover_beach

    December 22, 2009 at 9:51 am

  16. Yobbo and Rafe, you’re both spouting rubbish now.

    Ray was a member of a neo-nazi brigade for many years, and only claimed after the fact that it was ‘for research’. Said research consisted of one ‘paper’ that would have been laughed out of any peer reviewed journal.

    It’s precisely for this reason that Ray is now rabidly pro-Israel. It’s a common tactic of those on the far-right (see also ‘Shire’ fascist Darrin Hodges). The former anti-semitism is displaced onto Muslims and Africans. It’ basically a tactical move.

    Here’s a text looking at racism within academia:

    Ray himself holds some forthright views on racism. His book Conservatism
    as heresy(81) includes chapters with such
    appetising titles as ‘Rhodesia: in defence of Mr Smith’ and ‘In defence of the
    White Australia policy’. Ray also argues that it is “moralistic nonsense” to
    denounce racism.
    Well might Ray defend racism. He does not mince his words
    when he writes about Australian Aborigines. Ray says that “aborigines are
    characterised by behaviour that in a white we would find despicable . . . White
    backlash is then reasonable. Unless we expect whites to forget overnight the
    cultural values that they have learned and practised all their lives, they will
    find the proximity of aboriginals unpleasant” (p.58).
    Ray has conducted a
    number of academic surveys in order to bolster his prejudices. For instance Ray
    assumes that it is natural that whites should develop an antipathy towards
    Aborigines:

    “If, for instance, people suddenly find themselves living in close contact
    with Aborigines and Aborigines happen to be in fact rather unhygienic in their
    habits, some people previously without prejudice will start to say that they
    don’t like Aborigines.” (p.261.)
    Therefore Ray designed a survey to measure
    white Australians’ attitudes towards Aborigines, comparing those who lived near
    Aborigines with those who lived further away.
    The results of his survey
    failed to confirm his prediction; Ray did not find that whites living near
    Aborigines were in fact more prejudiced. Ray described his results as
    “disappointing” (p.267). Instead of discarding his hypothesis, Ray still strove
    to maintain his own prejudices; he searched around for reasons why his
    questionnaire might not have obtained the correct results. Thus, even in the
    face of negative results, Ray clings to what he calls his ‘rational prejudice
    model’.
    Ray’s prejudices do not just relate to Aborigines. Dr. Ray enjoins us
    to “face the fact that large numbers of even educated Australians do not like
    Jews or ‘Wogs’.” (p.70.) Ray writes approvingly of people who will
    “among friends, exchange mocking misnomers for suburbs in which Jews have
    settled: Bellevue Hill becomes ‘Bellejew Hill’ and Rose Bay becomes ‘Nose Bay’;
    Dover Heights becomes ‘Jehova Heights’.” (p.71.)

    Ray obviously has sympathy with the racists and anti-Semites. Many of the
    people who make the comments Ray cites, are according to our Australian
    psychologist “superbly functioning and well-adjusted Australians”. In Ray’s
    opinion such people will “justly deny being racists” (p.70): n.b. the give-away
    word ‘justly’.
    The main reason why Ray does not find such attitudes racist is
    that he considers them perfectly logical. Thus he asserts that people “who don’t
    like sloth . . . may object to Aborigines. People who do not like grasping
    materialism, will certainly find no fault with Aborigines but they may find
    fault with Jews” (p.265).

    It seems that Dr Ray, in an academic paper about psychology, is repeating
    the racist and anti-Semitic assumptions that Aborigines are lazy and Jews are
    ‘grasping materialists’. It is hard to find any other explanation for Ray’s
    continual defence of prejudice.
    In his academic papers Ray has a tendency to
    use some curious turns of phrase. Thus when he criticises, as he often does, the
    classic work in the psychology of fascism, The Authoritarian Personality by
    Adorno, Frenkel-Brunswick, Levinson and Sanford, he refers to “the work of these
    Jewish authors” (see, for instance, the start of Ray’s article in the
    distinguished social science journal Human Relations).(82) This is not the standard way of describing
    opponents’ research, at least not since the days of Nazi Germany.
    But there
    again Ray is not exactly ignorant of the ways of Nazism. During the 1960s Ray
    was a member of various Australian Nazi parties. In fact Ray has openly
    described his seven-year association with Nazism (see, for instance, his article
    ‘What are Australian Nazis really like?’ in The Bridge, August 1972).

    http://www.ferris.edu/HTMLS/othersrv/isar/archives2/billig/chapter7.htm

    I’m afraid that Yobbo and Rafe are exhibiting some classic Bird-like tendencies here – they are so consumed with fear and hatred of teh left that they put their moral blinkers on when it comes to wanna-be fascist cranks like Jon Ray.

    THR

    December 22, 2009 at 10:58 am

  17. Like Quadrant, you actually need to read John Ray to find out what he has to offer

    Good idea. Have a look at Quadrant online. 90% of the stuff there could be re-writes of old opinion columns from the Australian. If it’s a ‘battle of ideas’ you’re after, these guys are still doing the Boer War.

    THR

    December 22, 2009 at 11:11 am

  18. John Ray has developed and nourished a persecution complex that blinds him to reality…

    Two weeks ago, Rog (The Man With The Golden Dumb) was insisting Malcolm Turnbull was destined for The Lodge and that a double dissolution was imminent. One week ago, he was insisting Australia’s ETS would influence the whole world.

    C.L.

    December 22, 2009 at 11:33 am

  19. I’ll say it again, John Ray continues to recycle opinion pieces, that contain no references, as fact.

    CL falls into the same category, a confabulator par excellence.

    Neither can be taken seriously

    rog

    December 22, 2009 at 12:18 pm

  20. Rog (A View To A Dill) yesterday argued that windmills have obviated nuclear power.

    C.L.

    December 22, 2009 at 12:24 pm

  21. THR the happy Marxists revolutionary! Are you happy with your revolution or hasn’t anyone told you the news yet?
    Someone should tell Rog as well.

    Rafe

    December 22, 2009 at 12:38 pm

  22. Rog says:

    “I’ll say it again, John Ray continues to recycle opinion pieces, that contain no references, as fact.”

    Here we have an assertion, “that Ray recycles opinion[s/ assertions], that contain no references, as fact”, that itself contains no references and is passing itself off as a fact.

    Now that is hoisting oneself on one’s own petard.

    dover_beach

    December 22, 2009 at 12:42 pm

  23. Rafe

    December 22, 2009 at 12:44 pm

  24. Rafe a person who takes Ray seriously is a moonbat.

    I am not surprised people like him here as Ray has been shown to be statistically challenged with a bullet

    Butterfield, Bloomfield & Bishop

    December 22, 2009 at 1:33 pm

  25. John Ray:

    So when I note that people tend to see Jews as “grasping materialists” and blacks as “lazy”, I do regard them as interpreting reality

    http://jonjayray.fortunecity.com/mehler.html

    Rafe, with all the intellectual and moral acuity of a drunken chimpanzee, championing the Herrenvolk:

    Referring to John Ray as a nazi or fascist is simply old-fashioned communist agit-propaganda, from sore losers in the battle of ideas.

    Even better was Ray’s extended, embarrassing attempt to take down Obama in 2008. After calling Obama both a Nazi and a commie, the tour de farce ended with Ray publishing nude pics of some chick, whom he claimed was Obama’s mother. He also claims that Africans are genetically inferior ‘pinheads’, according to top scientifical research.

    So do you admire Ray for his racism, Rafe, or his impeccable skills as a scientician?

    THR

    December 22, 2009 at 1:58 pm

  26. No flies on Homer’s stats. His prediction of 89 seats for Mark Latham in 2004 was a real doozy.

    C.L.

    December 22, 2009 at 2:04 pm

  27. Putting aside Ray’s past, rog has a point and I don’t see why he has to wide through Ray’s 50 blogs to document examples and write you a thesis, DB anymore than anytime someone disses LP here they have to do the same.

    I’ve read Ray in the past and the problem is he adopts a scattergun approach. There’s all sorts of dross and factoids mixed in with the actually interesting or correct bits of material.

    jtfsoon

    December 22, 2009 at 2:15 pm

  28. Rafe
    are you now saying that anyone who doesn’t worship ray is a commie?

    The Cold War is over dude. we won.

    jtfsoon

    December 22, 2009 at 2:18 pm

  29. Like most people with strong views who are driven to write great deal of stuff, not all is the same quality so you have to read with a critical eye.
    There are more important things to debate right now and I think the people who have been researching his site need to use their forensic skills on Computergate and the vagaries of policy under Kevin Rudd.
    I suppose we won the Cold War, or at least the other guys lost but as long as the debate gets conducted in terms of left and right we are not going to win the main event. Classical liberalism is still invisible on the political landscape.

    Rafe

    December 22, 2009 at 2:29 pm

  30. Not so, Rafe. Barnaby is reading J.S. Mill over the Christmas break, it was reported the other day. 🙂

    C.L.

    December 22, 2009 at 2:32 pm

  31. And The Red Hot Chilli Peppers 🙂

    tal

    December 22, 2009 at 2:37 pm

  32. Rudd could use some Chilli Peppers advice re the ETS:

    Give it away, give it away, give it away now…

    C.L.

    December 22, 2009 at 2:39 pm

  33. 🙂

    tal

    December 22, 2009 at 2:45 pm

  34. “Putting aside Ray’s past, rog has a point and I don’t see why he has to wide through Ray’s 50 blogs to document examples and write you a thesis, DB anymore than anytime someone disses LP here they have to do the same.”

    Jason, no one expected a thesis, but if you’ve claimed that he “Ray recycles opinion[s/ assertions], that contain no references, as fact”, a single representative example might have been deemed necessary if only to avoid the charge that one was engaging in what one is at the same time condemning.

    “I’ve read Ray in the past and the problem is he adopts a scattergun approach. There’s all sorts of dross and factoids mixed in with the actually interesting or correct bits of material.”

    Yes, Ray stands alone in the blogosphere in this respect. The man is an island.

    dover_beach

    December 22, 2009 at 5:50 pm

  35. Rafe, I am disappointed that you linked both Tim Blair and John Ray

    Like CL Tim Blair has little or nothing to offer – his endless and mindless parody isnt even funny and John Ray is like some angry old man in a nursing home.

    Hardly thoughtful and hardly progressive. Battles of ideology are counterproductive and a total waste of time – even John Quiggin has had the grace to acknowledge his occasional errors – surprising how he he is mostly right.

    rog

    December 22, 2009 at 5:52 pm

  36. I am in moderation, the JQ word

    rog

    December 22, 2009 at 5:53 pm

  37. Jeepers DB, no man is an island (where do you live, under a rock?)

    rog

    December 22, 2009 at 5:55 pm

  38. “Jeepers DB, no man is an island (where do you live, under a rock?)”

    Yes, I’ve rendered you homeless, rog.

    dover_beach

    December 22, 2009 at 5:58 pm

  39. John Ray is like some angry old man in a nursing home.

    Exactly. Except now, he’s apparently also a poster boy for ‘classic liberalism’. Meanwhile, his bloggy pals at AWH fantasise about the genocide of Muslims and ‘civil war’ against lefties in Australia and the States.

    THR

    December 22, 2009 at 6:59 pm


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: