The Bill Cosby sexual assault case is in full swing and I think it brings into amazing clarity the terrible position people find themselves in when they are sexually assaulted or serially harassed. On the witness stand and in the court of public opinion, the people who come forward with these accusations almost universally face vicious attack from the supporters of the accused, particularly when the suspects are celebrities.

In the Cosby case, the first woman to take the stand is being accused of all sorts of things by the defense attorneys. We see this same scenario play out again and again, most recently against people who accused Bill O’Reilly of misdeeds.

The attacks against the alleged victim are vicious to the extreme and it makes me wonder why anyone would come forward rather than taking a large monetary settlement. I think that’s why most victims of such crimes suffer in silence and why attackers get away with their behavior year after year. Some victims attempt to come forward and are squashed by their powerful attackers. Some come forward and pursue the case as best they can. Proving these attacks is not so easy. Many fail to have enough evidence to support a conviction.

In a court of law, we must have evidence and in these situations, it is generally the word of one person against the other. The need for this burden of proof is important and necessary. We cannot deny some people make false accusations. We cannot presume the accused is guilty. That is one of the factors making coming forward all the more difficult.

There are no easy answers to these sorts of situation nor is there any chance they will stop occurring. People in power unfortunately will sometimes abuse that power, that is an unhappy fact. Victims of such attacks have two initial options. They can go on with their lives and ignore the event happened. This is certainly the easy course. A terrible thing has been done but there is no chance to undo it. Bringing it to light will potentially harm the person accused but it might well not, and the accusers own reputation can be destroyed.

If the victim pursues the case there are again two possible outcomes. The accused can offer some sort of financial settlement or the case can proceed to criminal charges. Again, it seems to me the path of least resistance is to simply take the money and move on with your life. Pursuing a criminal case is going to take considerable time, money, and effort and there are no assurances of a positive outcome. The accuser can easily lose the case.

What’s the point of all this? I just hope to make these facts apparent to everyone negatively judging those who take money as settlements or those who go on about their lives without bringing charges.  The victims are doing what most of us would do and what is, frankly, sometimes the best course of action. Unfortunate as that may be.

Our court system protects criminals, particularly when it is the word of one person against another. I’m not saying this is a bad system, in fact I’m a firm believer in our legal doctrine, but I am suggesting in these sorts of cases it makes the decision to pursue criminal charges a difficult one.

Don’t be quick to leap to conclusions after finding out a person didn’t file charges immediately after the incident.

Tom Liberman

When we do something wrong we don’t claim responsibility for our actions, we admit culpability. I’m a writer and well aware of the power words convey. I’ve been thinking for a number of years that we should start using different verbiage after terrorist attacks.
Anyone who claims they took part in a terrorist act is admitting they have done terrible and irreparable harm. They are saying they admit culpability to their vicious crime. Let’s call it what it is. That’s what I think at least.

Some might argue terrorist organizations have succeeded in their goal and therefore they can claim credit. That the attack is ostensibly a good thing from the point of view of a terrorist or those that support such. The reality is far different. I’ve written before, at some length, how terrorist attacks actually harm the people they are intended to help far more than immediate victims.

If you look at the larger picture of a terrorist attack, the only conclusion to draw is the people the act purports to help, suffer horrifically. I’m not even sure what the terrorists hope to accomplish anymore, but their stated objectives are generally based on the removal of oppressors from their land. The problem is their actions don’t work. They just make the oppressors more virulent, violent, and oppressive.

There is no doubt the theocratic regimes in Saudi Arabia, Yemen, and Egypt are extremely brutal. Those governments are backed, almost without question, by the United States. I get where the terrorists are coming from, I really do. I know this point of view will raise eyebrows. The reality is people who are carrying out these violent attacks have a legitimate complaint. The problem is their method simply makes the situation worse; for the terrorists and the people the terrorists hope to help. These actions generally create sympathy and solidarity within the governments the terrorists hate so much.

For every person killed by a terrorist, thousands of those the terrorist purports to support are killed. The regimes they hope to oust are made stronger, the oppression greater, and the resolve of the western nations that support them more stalwart.

For each and every terror attack, there is no winner. There is no claiming of responsibility, just an admission of terrible wrong. The terrorist has directly killed and maimed innocents and indirectly killed and maimed even more.

Doing as I suggest is not going to stop a terrorist from carrying out heinous activity. They are bent on their destructive ways and there is likely nothing anyone can do to talk them out of it. Still, I think it’s best to use the proper words in situations like this. It’s culpability we’re looking at, not credit.

Do you agree?

Tom Liberman

Over one in three people in the United States is considered obese. The price of that obesity is beyond measurement in dollars and human suffering. These are undeniable facts, but what solutions are available in a free nation where we cannot, and should not, control what people choose to eat and drink? One answer lies in education. Home Economics. Gym Class.

These are places we can teach young people to prepare healthy foods at a reasonable cost and learn to love exercise. These are things a free nation can do. The popularity of cooking shows is undeniable and the joy in preparing a meal for the people you love is palpable. Athletic achievement is a feeling of delight that I find difficult to express with the written word.

There are so many wonderful things about exercising and cooking that it’s astonishing we’ve managed to drift away from such pleasures. I understand people are busy today. I get that we have easy access to food prepared for us. I do not deny the reason we are so obese is related to the abundance of food and our sedentary society.

One thing I’m sure about is we can’t force people to stop eating and drinking fatty foods. We cannot regulate exercise. When I say can’t, what I really mean is we must not. In a totalitarian state, we can restrict the size of drink. This works. You might laugh when the state attempts to restrict a drink size, you scoff and say people will just purchase two drinks. They sometimes do but they sometimes don’t. Restricting the size of a drink works. Raising taxes on cigarettes works. All the studies indicate the state can effectively, but not completely, modify the behavior of the people. Yet, this is a path we must not follow.

Food is abundant. Cheap food with a high fat content is everywhere. People drive everywhere instead of walking. Most jobs require people stay seated for the entirety of their work day. Kids can find endless entertainment in front of their computer. They can socialize with all their friends without leaving the comfort of their favorite chair. All these things are true, all these things contribute to the problem of obesity. All of these things are not going to change.

Obesity effects all our lives. People are suffering health problems in increasing numbers and that has essentially put our entire healthcare industry on the brink of failure. People are unable to do their jobs which puts an unnecessary burden on the able-bodied. We can’t find enough people to serve in the military. We must sit next to obese people on planes, buses, in cars, on benches. We share our lives with them in many undeniable ways even if we are not obese ourselves. It is in my interest for this nation to overcome the problem, but in a way that does not destroy our freedom.

The answers are not easy. Good solutions are rarely simple. But, it seems a good idea to spend some time teaching kids the wonder of cooking, eating healthy foods, and exercising. There is so much value in these things. We prepare children for adult life in school and we used to consider cooking and exercising part of that education.

I know many children don’t want to take gym class. I watched with pity as friends of mine stood against the gym wall not only feeling the humiliation of being picked last but also dreading the moment when they were asked to perform in the field. I was certainly not interested in cooking when I was forced to take said course while in school.

I know our school districts are strapped for funds and I know there is no easy way to make all this happen. Still, it seems to me there is a clear course of action we can take. We can enforce recess starting at an early age. Go out, play. No phone. We can teach cooking starting in kindergarten and make it a mandatory course through high school.

Certainly, we cannot force people to eat less or exercise more. Perhaps by giving them a little shove when they are young, we can change our nation. It’s worth a try.

Tom Liberman

There was a big Social Media story about a young girl who was pulled by a sea lion into Steveston Fisherman’s Wharf in Vancouver. In response, the region is now crowded with visitors, many with children in tow, likely hoping to see something similar. Are you shocked? Apparently much of the internet finds those visitors to be rather stupid. Commenters are filling up the stories with diatribes about how unwise are these people.

Really? You’re shocked people flock to the site of such an incident? You’re patting yourself on the back because you’re so much smarter than them? Ha! I absolutely guarantee most of the people making these comments would be lined up on the wharf with camera in hand if they lived in the region.

Heck, if I lived in the area I’d probably go myself. It’s an interesting story and I’d take a picture with my non-existent child leaning over the railing, and send it to all my friends. I hate crowds, introvert is me, so that would be a discouraging factor but if given the opportunity I can’t deny my natural curiosity. That’s what is going on, natural human behavior. I’d be shocked if there weren’t thousands of people with their children at the wharf.

And, as long as we’re talking about human nature, this need to congratulate ourselves because we know we wouldn’t be as stupid as all those other people certainly fits the same pattern. It seems to be an irresistible compulsion to spend a great deal of time and effort trying to convince ourselves we’re better than everyone else. We’re smart and they are stupid. I’d never do all those silly things. The internet gives us the means and opportunity to do so at an unprecedented level.

I like to consider myself a fairly intelligent fellow but I fall into the same patterns as everyone else. When I pass an accident on the road, I rail against all the idiots rubbernecking but then do exactly the same thing as I go by. I like to think I’m a bit smarter about it and keep my eye on the road more than most, but the temptation to see what caused the accident and the result therein overwhelms human sensibilities.

The fact we fall into predictable behaviors is something advertisers, lobbyists, and others use to manipulate us into doing what they want. It’s good to be aware of human nature so you can be cautious of those trying such maneuvers. If you pretend you are not subject to the same failings as everyone else, you are tempted to believe you wouldn’t be taking pictures at Steveston Wharf. You would, trust me.

Tom Liberman

I hate to break the bad news to all the alarmist, but race relations are absolutely fantastic in the United States. Interracial marriages are at an all-time high. Tolerance of homosexuals is growing beyond any level seen before. Atheists like me are freer to come out and talk about our lack of belief with greater security than at any time in the history of our nation. I’m of Jewish descent as well and it’s never been a better time to be a Jew.

Ladies, Gentleman, Transgenders, Blacks, Whites, Asians, Gays, Straights, Jews, Christians, Muslims, Atheists, Old People, Young People, Hipsters, and all the rest; don’t believe the haters that crowd the comment sections or the talking heads who thrive on ratings. We are more willing to understand each other and put up with each other than ever. Race relations are better than ever.

A black man dating a white woman in Kansas, a cowboy in New York City, a hipster in Stillwater, a Cardinals fan in Chicago, we are more willing to live and let live than ever. Be a decent human and work hard, you are welcome just about everywhere.

That reality doesn’t make people who have a vested interest in keeping us apart happy. There are virulent racists in the world. There are misogynistic cretins. There are religious extremists. There are violent anarchists. These people are out there and their voices are loud but their numbers are dwindling.

The reason Islamic terrorists are blowing things up is because tolerance is winning. The reason White Supremacists are marching is because they are losing. The reason the comment section is filled with hate-filled rants is because these sorts are afraid others just want to lead their lives, that they don’t care about those other things. The internet has connected us to people all over the world who share like interests.

Does a redneck from Alabama love model trains? You bet. So too does a wealthy banker from New York City. They are online friends. They discuss their mutual interests and learn about each other. The difficulties of children, marriage, the hard day of dairy farming or investment banking. They discuss model trains and learn their mutual interests far outweigh their insignificant differences.

We are closer than we’ve ever been. We are not far from a world in which nothing matters but that which we enjoy. It is on the horizon, just in sight if you’re willing to squint and look closely. Kids today are more connected than they’ve ever been and they are linked with a wider array of friends than the world could even imagine twenty years ago. They are growing up in this world where all the meaningless external things that used to drive a wedge between us are invisible.

This frightens people. This terrifies authoritarian figures. This alarms those who don’t want you to be friends with people who are different in meaningless ways. They are reacting violently and that means the rest of us are winning, we just have to wait for them to die, and they will. Sad, angry, and surrounded by hate filled associates. They will all die.

This world is for the next generation, the tolerant generation. The best news of all is that it’s a wonderful time to be alive. It’s a fantastic time to be able to share your interests with people all over the world. It’s a time to learn and make friends that it would have been impossible to meet not long ago.

Relish this wonderful world. Find people who share your interests and ignore the angry voices that vie for your attention.

Forget about the fake troubles you read from various news sources that simply want your clicks. Those voices of hate? They are lying to you. They want something from you. Don’t give it to them.

Tom Liberman

A nuclear scientist by the name of Kara McCullough is in the news because of the answer she gave to a question about feminism while on her way to winning the Miss USA pageant. I think her answer, and the ensuing uproar, gives us interesting insight into what it is to be rationally moderate in this world. We are the majority but feel vastly outnumbered.

McCullough was asked if she considered herself a feminist. She answered that she preferred to use the term equalist. She went on to add she doesn’t consider herself one of those die-hards. By this she meant radicals who have made inflammatory statements.

She was immediately attacked on Social Media as mischaracterizing feminism as a man-hating movement. These attacks largely came from individuals who identify as left-wing.

The reaction to the reaction was swift, thanks Internet! Those on the opposite side of the spectrum quickly tried to associate every democrat, liberal, or feminist, as being part of the small group that was criticizing McCullough. And here we see the problem.

McCullough doesn’t want to associate herself with what are called radical feminists who have made any number of man-hating comments. And rightly so. This small group of people have hijacked the word feminism and given it a terrible connotation. Of course, the vast majority of feminists are more in line with McCullough. They want equality, they don’t see men as an obstacle or an enemy.

Meanwhile, the vast majority of people who are now attacking those making nasty comments about McCullough are actually pretty much equalist as well. They don’t think women are chattel to be owned. They don’t imagine that women are incapable of being lawyers, doctors, soldiers, or anything else.

If only those two groups could somehow be made to realize they are basically on the same side. We make up the majority. We outnumber the few man-haters and misogynists by enormous numbers.

Yet the vocal few taint the image of all the rest. Those screaming and yelling and refusing any compromise paint an entire group with the red brush of hate. They benefit from the duality of left and right. They profit because the majority are centrists, equalists. By splitting those in the center toward their wing, they bolster their numbers and impact.

Every time I read an article, I scroll down to the comments section. There is always someone making a moderate and rational point about the story in question. Every time this is immediately drowned out by the roar of the few. This roar gives the impression of many. It lures moderates into one camp or the other by portraying enemies as irrational, angry, and violent.

The opposite is true. If only we knew it, the vast majority of people would find they largely agree on issues.

I absolutely believe most people in this world are equalists, like McCullough. Yet the few who are not seem to drive a wedge between the nuanced many. Yes, people who are equalists differ in certain small factors of that equality.

The problem is that we get nowhere by yelling at each other, by refusing to compromise on minor points. And yet we seem to go further down this path every day, driven by those who gain from strife and rage. Those few.

Tom Liberman

The healthcare debate often focuses on the undeniable fact that people who are in the last year of  life spend a huge amount of money trying to stay alive. This is one of the primary driving forces in the cost of healthcare. While it is true, I find the point being made, and the people making it, quite disturbing.

Someone in their last year of life does not know they are going to die. They want to stay alive. There are plenty of cases where people are given medical care and survive for many years if not decades. When you argue that these people are going to die anyway, just let them, you are engaging in, essentially, murder.

When I read one article or another making this argument it seems to me the person so writing is promoting Death Panels. Basically, a group of people on a panel needs to examine the prognosis of a patient and if it determines the outcome is likely death, withhold treatment.

I would think the vast majority of people would reject this out of hand. And yet I see it suggested in a veiled fashion almost every day. I read an article talking about how people who are very sick are the problem. Again, it’s true that these people use a much larger share of the money designated for healthcare. I don’t pretend it is false. I just don’t like the implication of the argument.

The demographics of our country are absolutely the driving force of the healthcare crisis. We have an aging and increasingly unhealthy population. There is nothing we can do about the passage of time. People get older. We can focus on proper diet and exercise to prevent a huge chunk of our healthcare issues. That’s a problem with a solution. So, why aren’t we doing so? I’ll save that discussion for another day.

I just want you to be aware of what you are really saying when you talk about the last year of a person’s life being a problem. There are those who actually argue for death panels. There are those who think people over a certain age should voluntarily turn themselves into the disintegration chambers. I have a bit of respect for those who so advocate. At least they are being honest about their intentions. Those who lament about the last year of life but pretend they are not proposing Death Panels don’t fool me. I find them disgusting.

I hope we will never reach a point in this country where we value treating sick people less than we value money. I hope people will never feel the need to rid our society of those who they deem less worthy of life. We’ve seen that before, and I’m fully aware that it can happen again.

So, when I see article after article reiterating the problem of people in the last year of their life, I grow concerned. I hope you do as well.

Tom Liberman

A satanic monument is scheduled to be placed in the Veteran’s Memorial Park of Belle Plaine, Minnesota. The entire episode came about because a Christian monument was placed in the same location and the Satanic Temple decided they wanted to honor the fallen with their own memorial. So, is Satanic Patriotism as good as any other kind of patriotism?

There’s a lot of talk about separation of church and state and the Constitution of the United States but I wanted to examine the more personal issue of how we feel when someone we despise does something ostensibly good. When we see Satanic Patriotism.

The monument the Satanic Temple plans to place can only be described as poignant. If it had Christian or non-denominational symbols on the side rather than Satanic, I feel confident in saying it would receive universal acclaim. The sentiment to honor fallen soldiers is also something that would normally be applauded. It’s the people placing the monument who are raising ire.

It should be noted the organization that manages the park, including many veterans, has apparently been very open and welcoming to the monument. That’s pretty cool, but the reality is a lot of people are quite opposed to it and vocally so.

Before we leap on those angry people, take a moment to examine how much you like that Ku Klux Klan sign sponsoring the highway you drive by on a regular basis.

Is someone all bad? Is anyone all good? If Satanists want to honor fallen veterans isn’t that a good thing? If the KKK wants to clean up a section of the highway or a river, isn’t that a good thing? I think this is an important question that has ramifications far beyond one monument.

One of the ways organizations like ISIS succeed is when they help people. They provide jobs and medical services to those in worn-torn nations. We certainly don’t like ISIS, they clearly engage in many horrific activities. But when they sponsor medical care to wounded children, isn’t that a good thing?

We have this tendency to put people and organizations into categories and that can be extremely damaging. When we decide Republicans are all good or President Trump is all bad, we miss out on opportunity and acquiesce to damaging legislation. If you are a Republican and support any piece of legislation from those you generally support, it is certain you are promoting some bad laws. If you hate President Trump and oppose every idea he puts forward, you are clearly working against some good legislation.

Not only are you promoting bad or failing to support good, but you are creating a world of black and white. Good or evil. This sort of categorization is what allows group like ISIS to thrive. When we as a nation refuse to admit our enemies engage in some very reasonable activities, we are making a mistake.

I ask anyone who is opposed to this monument, anyone who plans to vandalize this tribute to our veterans, anyone who would be opposed to the same monument if it was sponsored by White Nationalists; why?

Would the world be a better place if we simply encouraged people and organizations who performed good deeds? If we discouraged those who do wrong?

Certainly, we can debate what is a good deed or what is a bad. We can say people do good things for the wrong reason, but does that make it less of a noble deed?

If you denounce a good thing because you don’t like the person who did it, well, who is the bad person?

Tom Liberman

One of the leading candidates to become the President of France is married to Brigitte Macron and their relationship brings up a number of interesting legal and societal questions. Emmanuel Macron met Brigitte when he was her fifteen-year-old student at La Providence High School in Amiens. She was thirty-nine at the time. They official announced they were dating when he turned seventeen.

The two eventually married when Emmanuel reached the age of thirty, shortly after she divorced her husband. He is the step-father to her three children, the oldest of whom is older than Emmanuel. All of this came to my attention thanks to a Facebook post expressing disgust at the relationship. Let the comments begin.

Some people are horrified by the age difference, while others don’t think it is anyone’s business. I’m certainly in the latter group. If people want to carry on affairs outside of marriage, I don’t much care. If a young man falls in love with an older woman, I don’t care. If an older woman has a relationship with a younger man, I don’t care. If a teacher and a fifteen-year-old student have an affair, I don’t really care. I know that last one is going to raise some ire.

The teacher is in a position of responsibility over a student and such an affair raises all sorts of questions about coercion. In the United States, if such a relationship occurred and was proven, Brigitte would have been tried and likely put in prison.

What’s important is that some people do care, and they have every right to their opinion. If they are outraged by this marriage, that’s their business to be disgusted. I don’t much care they are revolted. I think people are way too concerned about how other people carry on with their lives, but I’d be a hypocrite if I told them they shouldn’t be disgusted. That’s their choice.

If the laws in France allow for teachers and students to carry on sexual relationships then those are the laws of that country. I live in the United States and I have no more right to legislate in France than a French person has a right to pass laws in the United States.

If someone refuses to vote against Emmanuel because of this relationship, that is his or her right. If someone chooses to ignore the relationship and vote for him, that is also her or his decision to make.

The fact the two are now married leads me to believe their love was best for them, despite the age difference and the circumstances of their meeting. Certainly, you might disagree.

As a Libertarian I think it’s extraordinarily important people be allowed to their opinions and nations keep laws to a minimum. One of the first thing Totalitarian leaders do is attempt to force people to behave in certain ways. They do this primarily through legislation and personal attacks. The more power we vest in the state, the greater its ability to force us into a particular version of moral right.

Emmanuel and Brigitte have a relationship many might find disturbing. The fact they are legally allowed to do so is a good thing, and so is the right of some to withhold support for Emmanuel based on that relationship.

Tom Liberman

Yes, I’m saying runaway rather than Tad Cummins kidnap victim. I’ve waited to comment on this story because it seemed like there was more to it than we original knew, and now we find out the girl’s mother was a serial abuser. The girl was fleeing a terrible situation.

I’m not excusing Cummins for his behavior. He is the adult and he should never have allowed the situation with the girl to become so personal and certainly not intimate. He deserves what he has coming to him. That being said, the girl was fleeing a terrible situation with the one person who showed her any kindness. If this had occurred three years into the future, when she was eighteen, things would likely have turned out differently.

It doesn’t take much imagination to believe she might have been better off with Cummins. Again, I’ll state for a second time to head off the criticism I know is headed my way, Cummins was way out of line. He failed as a teacher, as an adult, and as someone who was trying to help the girl.

That being said, I think it’s clear they were love. The girl was one of ten children, all who apparently suffered horrific physical and likely mental abuse from their mother. The father left the situation about a year and a half ago and took custody of the children. It’s likely the abuse didn’t suddenly start in 2014 when it was first reported. It’s probable the girl and her siblings suffered from decades of abuse.

The girl was subject to serious physical abuse and looking for a way out. She found it in Cummins. It’s not completely impossible to rule out the idea that she was the instigator in all of this, although this certainly does not excuse his behavior. He had other options. He could have arranged for the girl to get away from the abuse and then waited the three years required for them to be together. He chose not to do that.

It all comes back to child abuse. If the girl’s mother hadn’t brutally beaten her children, if the girl’s father hadn’t sat back and watched it for years before finally leaving, if the state was allowed to take the children away; it’s likely none of this would have happened. It’s also quite probable the girl’s mother was abused herself as a child.

There aren’t easy answers to all of this. It’s not easy for the state to take children away from their parents and that’s a good thing. I think parents should have a fairly large amount of leeway in how they choose to raise their children.

The next question is what to do now? As it stands, what will happen is the girl will likely be returned to her father, which may or may not solve the abuse problem. Cummins will go to jail. Will the girl be better off with her father than with Cummins? Is Cummins a threat to general society? Is the father part of the abuse? I don’t know the answers and that’s unpleasant. There might not be a good solution.

The length of time this story captivated the public proves how much cases like this fascinate us.

I don’t have any great revelations or epiphanies about this situation. It would be nice if there weren’t people abusing children out there.

That’s about it.

Teens rebel against their parents, people rebel against the norms. For every cultural norm, we see people embracing counterculture. You’ll laugh when I talk about the latest counterculture movement. Goth ice cream.

Lately a lot of unicorns and rainbows have shown up in various places around the internet and in the physical world. We see Unicorn Frappuccino at Starbucks, rainbow sneakers from Nike, and many other combinations of the two just about everywhere you look.

There is nothing wrong with unicorns or rainbows. Anyone who takes delight in adorning themselves, gulping down, or otherwise enjoying colorful and single horned things is perfectly fine. What happens is that some people; contrarians, skeptics, whatever you want to call them, are willing to challenge things just for the sheer enjoyment of testing the normal. Some people get sick of seeing popular trends and lash out with things like Goth ice cream. Good for them!

I must admit a strong tendency to cut off my nose to spite my face. What this indicates is someone who behaves in self-destructive ways in an overreaction to something else.

It is in the very nature of rebellion to ultimately defeat the enemy. Eventually Goth ice cream might well become the normal and then people will rebel against it, perhaps even the same people who are currently promoting it as they fight against the rainbow and unicorn trend.

The important thing is what counterculture brings us. Without counterculture, we have stagnation. Without counterculture, we miss out on all sorts things. Music is constantly subject to this phenomenon with Nirvana being one of the most outstanding examples. That band came up with a new style of music and we all benefited. Well, many of us at least.

All of this is a good and natural thing. It is part of human nature to want to rebel against the standards of the time. While some people enjoy marching to the beat of a particular drum, there will always be others who refuse. The only way to completely stamp out such counterculture is with a totalitarian government. Counterculture is what authoritarians fear the most, they attempt to arrest, imprison, and execute anyone who dares speak out against their way of life.

When people are free to sell Goth ice cream on every corner it means we are free to do largely as we desire. People like to compare things to the Nazi regime in Germany and it’s not always valid. But to give you an example of a real totalitarian state; when you called the operator in Nazi Germany to give them a phone number, it was required you say D as in Dora, not D as in David. So, don’t underestimate Goth ice cream, my friends.

The ability to do as we please without interference from the government is important. Remember that right now people are trying to pass laws about what you can wear, what music you can listen to, what items you can purchase, what chemicals you can put in your body. Each time we pass laws limiting the ability of people to freely express themselves, to do as they please, we make the world a less wonderful place.

In conclusion, Goth ice cream is a beautiful thing.

Tom Liberman