Murray Rothbard), the same Austrian school economist who recommended a “flourishing child market.”

For the curious, source is chapter 14 “Children and Rights” of the 1982 book The Ethics of Liberty by Rothbard

Quote:

Now if a parent may own his child (within the framework of non-aggression and runaway freedom), then he may also transfer that ownership to someone else. He may give the child out for adoption, or he may sell the rights to the child in a voluntary contract. In short, we must face the fact that the purely free society will have a flourishing free market in children. Superficially, this sounds monstrous and inhuman. But closer thought will reveal the superior humanism of such a market. For we must realize that there is a market for children now, but that since the government prohibits sale of children at a price, the parents may now only give their children away to a licensed adoption agency free of charge. This means that we now indeed have a child-market, but that the government enforces a maximum price control of zero, and restricts the market to a few privileged and therefore monopolistic agencies. The result has been a typical market where the price of the commodity is held by government far below the free-market price: an enormous “shortage” of the good. The demand for babies and children is usually far greater than the supply, and hence we see daily tragedies of adults denied the joys of adopting children by prying and tyrannical adoption agencies. In fact, we find a large unsatisfied demand by adults and couples for children, along with a large number of surplus and unwanted babies neglected or maltreated by their parents. Allowing a free market in children would eliminate this imbalance, and would allow for an allocation of babies and children away from parents who dislike or do not care for their children, and toward foster parents who deeply desire such children. Everyone involved: the natural parents, the children, and the foster parents purchasing the children, would be better off in this sort of society.

Cobras and other small snakes (venomous or not) are maligned (unfairly, I know) in Vietnamese culture as sly, slick, and wily animals. Hence the comparison.

Previously, the Buddhist Association of China announced in July that it has agreed to revoke the ordination certificate of Shi Yongxin, former abbot of the renowned Shaolin Temple, over suspected criminal offenses, according to the Xinhua News Agency.

Shi Yongxin is suspected of criminal offences, including embezzling and misappropriating project funds and temple assets. He has also been accused of serious violations of Buddhist precepts, maintaining long-term inappropriate relationships with multiple women and having at least one illegitimate child, Xinhua reported, citing the Shaolin Temple management office.

If the investigations would substantiate those allegations against Shi Yongxin, then Shi Yongxin would be indeed a cobra monk (from Vietnamese ‘sư hổ mang’).

It is antisemitic of Isnotrael to conflate Isnotrael’s well-documented crimes (genocide, siege, mass starvation) with the Jewish people as a whole.

The State of Palestine also quote-posted the Italian progressive magazine L’Espresso:

My rough translation from Italian:

The annexation of Cisjordan (a.k.a. West Bank), with the soldiers complicit with the colonists. Gaza annihilated. The advance into Lebanon. The border violated in Syria. The war against Iran. Ethnic cleansing and massacres. Thus the Zionist right gives shape to Greater Israel

[…]

THE ABUSE

The late Palestinian poet and writer Refaat Alareer accurately observed thus:

May he rest in peace!

Reminder: Zionist propagandist Bari Weiss sicced the IOF on Alareer; they then murdered him and many of members of his family.