Quantcast

Yesterday, Students For Liberty staff and volunteers held a reception at the World Health Organization’s COP7 FCTC in New Delhi, India in order to present WHO with a very auspicious prize — the Least Transparent Organization of the Galaxy Award. 

SFL's Yael Ossowski

SFL’s Yael Ossowski

While the Council of Parties had its seventh conference (COP7) in the Delhi metropolitan area, we aimed to draw attention to the dogmatic attempts of the WHO to fight harm reducing and innovative technologies such as vaporizers and electronic cigarettes.

The WHO further qualifies for the award as it’s a shining beacon of hope for all proponents of keeping negotiations between bureaucrats secret and faintly informing the public only once their fate has been decided upon.

             Learn more & take the quiz at: nannystate.in

The smog and pollution outside is the most hazardous it’s ever been, but the UN health bureaucrats would rather regulate what we put into our own bodies than even think about harm reduction.

We were there at the event and stood up for individual rights with our local Indian activists, and we’re already going viral.

CHECK OUT THE VIDEO:

And the stunt made a splash on Twitter as well — check out the commentary under #COP7FCTC and look out for SFL-ers Fred Roeder and Yael Ossowski(more…)

The full criteria for making it to our prestigious shortlist is kept secret in the spirit of the Award itself. However, it is no secret that the WHO has earned a galaxy-wide reputation by conducting the largest health experiments on humans in known history – and did so without compromising the results with pesky public scrutiny over its decision-making processes.

Screen Shot 2016-11-01 at 7.35.43 PM

The esteemed award.

While the Council of Parties has its seventh conference (COP7) in the Delhi metropolitan area, we would like to draw attention to the dogmatic attempts of the WHO to fight harm reducing and innovative technologies such as vaporizers and electronic cigarettes. The WHO further qualifies for the award as it’s a shining beacon of hope for all proponents of keeping negotiations between bureaucrats secret and faintly informing the public only once their fate has been decided upon.

The Least Transparent Organization of the Galaxy Award is a Bricked-Up Door held up by four pillars – one pillar representing the common good, one for superiority, one causes harm as it prevents harm reduction, and one holds the door firmly shut.

We would like to invite all WHO representatives and interested public to join us for the award ceremony on Tuesday, November 8th at 7:30pm at the Le Meridien Hotel Delhi (Room: FF1 Hall). Snacks and drinks will be served while we give an ironic toast to the WHO.

Address: FF1 Hall at the Le Meridien Hotel, 8 Windsor Place, Janpath, New Delhi, Delhi 110001, India

Students For Liberty is awarding the WHO in order to bring attention to the absurd lifestyle regulations in place across the world which limit our individual freedoms and choices.

This award is part of a movement to fight against the laws and rules put in place by governmental agencies who want to tell us how to live our lives and what we should put into our bodies.

These regulations limit not only our personal choices in our own lives, but also in the marketplace. Young people cherish their freedom and their ability to make their own individual decisions without the Nanny State’s interference. #NoNanny needed!

For more information, or to get involved with this project, contact SFL CFO Fred Roeder, +1-202-621-4147 froeder@studentsforliberty.org

The following is an open letter from all of us at Students For Liberty.

For more information, or to join the SFL network, please subscribe here or reach out to North American Programs Director David Clement at dclement@studentsforliberty.org. 

Dear College Republicans,

Here at Students For Liberty, we know what it’s like to work hard to advance liberty. We recognize there are many ways to spread the ideas of free markets and limited government — and that they don’t always align with the neat divisions in mainstream politics.

Considering the widespread distaste for the current major party candidates, we want to make this clear: if you are a College Republican (or Republican-affiliated) group and feel unable to support the party’s choice of candidate, we are more than willing to provide you with any resources you need. 

In this polarizing election, we’ve taken a stand to advocate for people and education over politics and division. You’re invited to become part of this much-needed conversation by joining of the SFL network.

We provide grants, training, activism resources, and access to a network of pro-liberty students not just in the United States, but all around the world. If your group is interested in Second Amendment issues, take a look at our “Get Out the Liberty” grants and our #NotJustAGun campaign. We’ve also been supporting activism against the nanny state and over-regulation, and some of our Canadian groups took over a storefront to creatively show how regulation damages individual choice. If you’re worried about free speech on campus, SFL can help activists make free speech walls and “police” campus free speech zones to show the ridiculousness of such restrictions.

Whatever your issue of choice is, we’re here to help make sure pro-liberty beliefs are represented on college campuses across the country (and world)! We’ll never subject you to a purity test or demand allegiance to any particular candidate or approach. As long as your message is pro-liberty, we’re more than happy to help.

Since we’re not a chapter-based organization, College Republicans groups can retain their status while still taking advantage of resources from SFL. We want to make sure liberty-minded student groups are getting the support they need despite the challenges and frustrations of this election cycle.

sfl_logo

 

Sincerely & For Liberty, 

SFL North America 

BANNER_1
If you haven’t yet registered to attend the biggest conference for liberty-loving students in the Tri-State area — What’s the hold up?

It’s at New York University, it’s entirely free, and now, WE ARE HOSTING A FILM FESTIVAL in connection with THE MOVING PICTURE INSTITUTE and TALIESIN NEXUS!

Four Finalists will be screened in front of our panel of experts, and one grand prize winner will be granted an ALL-EXPENSES-PAID trip to LOS ANGELES for the APOLLO WRITING WORKSHOP at UCLA.

Submit any films you’ve made in the past four years. This could mean any immigrant memoirs, stories on LGBT rights, documentaries on corruption, etc etc etc!

Register today and invite your friends (especially you filmmakers)!  On top of all that, we have a lineup of incredible speakers and topics:

  • St. Lawrence University economist Steve Horwitz on the Great Recession!
  • Forbes’ 30 Under 30 Liya Palagashvili on the cross section of affordable housing and entrepreneurship!
  • American University Professor Daniel Lin on the realities of student debt!
  • Activist Matt Kibbe on socialism, a societal disaster!
  • With opening keynote speaker TK Coleman!

Register now!

If you have any questions, shoot me an email calvin.tran@nyu.edu

The following is a guest post by Students For Liberty Campus Coordinator, Zachary Woodman

k10843Most people think that democracy is not only the best government around, but is also the best government conceivable. Many political philosophers and nearly all lay political voters think that democracy is somehow uniquely just, and any deviations from democratic political processes are inherently unjust. However, recent experience with democracies has caused unease for many proponents of democracies; it seems voters are regularly choosing bad policies, such as Brexit, and bad leaders, such as Trump or Clinton. These trends in the West have challenged the blind faith in the premise that democracy is the ideal form of government.

It is in an intensely dogmatic pro-democratic discourse that Georgetown University philosopher Jason Brennan’s new book Against Democracy comes to the scene. Brennan argues that democracy is not inherently just and we should choose what procedural form government takes (e.g. democracy, monarchy, or oligarchy) based off of the results of their form of governments. Though democracy might be the best form of government we have tried yet, it still has some pretty hefty flaws, and we might be able to settle for another form of government which works better. Brennan considers these flaws and argues that we should consider an alternative called epistocracy or “rule of the knowers.”

The first two chapters point out the flaws in democracies as they operate in the real-world, summarizing key insights from political science and public choice theory. First Brennan divides people into three ideal types: hobbits, hooligans, and vulcans. Hobbits, who comprise a majority of the population, are generally apathetic about politics. Hooligans, who comprise a majority of politically active voters in the population, treat politics like a sporting event; they are extremely ignorant and misinformed, they process political information in a systematically biased and irrational way to conform to their pre-existing ideologies and dogmatically cheer for their political “team” no matter what. Vulcans, meanwhile, are a tiny minority who are knowledgeable about politics and care only for the facts when deliberating about how to vote.

The empirical evidence shows that most voters are hooligans and most hobbits are more likely to be potential hooligans than vulcans. This isn’t because most people are inherently ignorant or irrational, but because the democratic process creates an incentive to be so. Brennan summarizes the empirical research and public choice theory surrounding the phenomenon of voter ignorance: the costs of becoming knowledgeable are extremely high, yet the chances of one vote making a difference in an election are vanishingly small, meaning voters have no incentive to become informed. This is called rational ignorance. Further, since the stakes are very low for an individual voter in an election, they have little incentive to making voting decisions rationally, what economist Bryan Caplan calls “rational irrationality.” (more…)