The Mises Community
An online community for fans of Austrian economics and libertarianism, featuring forums, user blogs, and more.

Polanski

rated by 0 users
This post has 7 Replies | 2 Followers

Top 50 Contributor
Posts 703
Points 12,670
JAlanKatz Posted: Tue, Oct 13 2009 9:29 PM

I had a few thoughts on Roman Polanski I thought I'd put up for comments, to see if others think they are reasonable:

1.  The Hollywood claim that his art makes his rape ok is absurd - but far less absurd than the generally-accepted line about Ted Kennedy.  After all, Polanski didn't kill anyone, and at least he did create positive things.  Kennedy is supposedly "redeemed" by a lifetime living off the public trough and destroying wealth.

2.  The girl has seconded Polanski's request for a dismissal, saying she doesn't want him prosecuted.  How can a libertarian not therefore support a dismissal?

3.  He's alleging prosecutorial and judicial misconduct, and judges are agreeing.  He was granted a plea bargain under which he pled guilty, then after the plea the judge wanted to change his sentence without permitting him to back out.  He fled the country - how many wouldn't if they had the means and were in this situation?

4.  On the other hand, it's not like he ended up in this situation entirely by accident.

  • | Post Points: 35
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 7,643
Points 132,750
MVP
SystemAdministrator

JAlanKatz:
After all, Polanski didn't kill anyone, and at least he did create positive things.

Weird reasoning.

JAlanKatz:
The girl has seconded Polanski's request for a dismissal, saying she doesn't want him prosecuted.  How can a libertarian not therefore support a dismissal?

I agree.

JAlanKatz:
He fled the country - how many wouldn't if they had the means and were in this situation?

Fair enough, but how many of us wouldn't have raped if we had the means?

JAlanKatz:
On the other hand, it's not like he ended up in this situation entirely by accident.

Bingo.

If you find something evil that wobbles, push it. - Gary North

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 50 Contributor
Posts 703
Points 12,670
JAlanKatz replied on Tue, Oct 13 2009 10:16 PM

liberty student:

JAlanKatz:
After all, Polanski didn't kill anyone, and at least he did create positive things.

Weird reasoning.

Sure, if you quote it that way.  My point was not that this defense is meaningful - I began by saying that the Hollywood defense is absurd.  My point was simply that the Hollywood defense, while absurd, is in some way less absurd than the Ted Kennedy defense.  Do you disagree?

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 7,643
Points 132,750
MVP
SystemAdministrator

JAlanKatz:
Sure, if you quote it that way.  My point was not that this defense is meaningful - I began by saying that the Hollywood defense is absurd.  My point was simply that the Hollywood defense, while absurd, is in some way less absurd than the Ted Kennedy defense.  Do you disagree?

I'm not sure why the disintinction matters.  It's like if you ask me if I want sales taxes or an income tax.

The "hollywood defense" doesn't have anything to do with what he actually did.  And likewise, Kennedy's situation isn't really relevant either.

No big deal.  I just thought that was an awkward phrase.

If you find something evil that wobbles, push it. - Gary North

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 5,196
Points 88,450
Juan replied on Tue, Oct 13 2009 10:44 PM
Rape is just 'subjective preference'. Maybe A thinks she was raped, but B doesn't think it was rape. You can't really know what 'objectively' happened. You see, there only exists A's subjective opinion/preference and B's subjective opinion/preference. I don't see what's the fuss all about. Nothing really happened.

February 17 - 1600 - Giordano Bruno is burnt alive by the catholic church.
Aquinas : "much more reason is there for heretics, as soon as they are convicted of heresy, to be not only excommunicated but even put to death."

  • | Post Points: 35
Top 25 Contributor
Male
Posts 1,810
Points 27,770
Moderator
MVP
Nitroadict replied on Tue, Oct 13 2009 11:13 PM

Juan:
Rape is just 'subjective preference'. 

This statement itself is subjective & rape itself still remains subject to scrutiny.

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 88
Points 1,345
WisR replied on Wed, Oct 14 2009 12:41 AM

Juan:
Rape is just 'subjective preference'. Maybe A thinks she was raped, but B doesn't think it was rape. You can't really know what 'objectively' happened. You see, there only exists A's subjective opinion/preference and B's subjective opinion/preference. I don't see what's the fuss all about. Nothing really happened.

Careful, Juan, many casual readers will think you are serious.

And according to this reasoning, nothing ever really happens.  

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 100 Contributor
Posts 392
Points 5,750
Kakugo replied on Wed, Oct 14 2009 7:15 AM

There's one thing nobody noticed. Polanski was a wanted man, right or wrong it doesn't matter, yet he was able to do pretty much whatever he wanted in public view: he could direct movies, attend festivals, shake hands with politicians and celebrities... Yet for thirty years the US judicial system took it easy with him. Curious behavior when they are ostensibly ready to go to war to capture a ghost in the Hindu Kush mountains and when tax evaders are hunted down with a ruthlessness that really makes you wonder if this is really "justice" or the "last gasp" of an addict desperately looking for his fix in the garbage bins.

Sorry for the rant chaps.

 Yes, it's time for the Dr Goebbels show!

  • | Post Points: 5
Page 1 of 1 (8 items) | RSS

Ludwig von Mises Institute | 518 West Magnolia Avenue | Auburn, Alabama 36832-4528

Phone: 334.321.2100 · Fax: 334.321.2119

contact@Mises.org | webmaster | AOL-IM MainMises

Mises.org sitemap