PrairiePundit

NY Times:   A long-running dispute between farmers and local officials in southern  China  exploded into open rebellion this week after villagers chased away government leaders, set up roadblocks and began arming themselves with homemade weapons, residents said. The conflict in Wukan, a coastal settlement near the country’s booming industrial heartland in Guangdong Province, escalated on Monday after residents learned that one of the representatives they had selected to negotiate with the local Communist Party had died in police custody. The authorities say a heart attack killed the 42-year-old man, but relatives say his body bore signs of torture. Spasms of social unrest in China have become increasingly common, a reflection of the widening income gap and deepening unhappiness with official corruption and an unresponsive justice system. But the clashes in Wukan, which first erupted in September, appear to be unusual for their longevity — and for the brazenness o...

Telegraph: Yang Youde, who lives on the outskirts of the bustling city of Wuhan, in central Hubei province, said he had fended off two eviction attempts with his improvised weapon, which uses ammunition made from locally sold fireworks. "I shot only over their heads to frighten them," he told the China Daily of his attacks on demolition workers sent to move him off his land. "I didn't want to cause any injuries." The rockets, which can travel over 100 yards, exploded with a deafening bang, the official paper added. It did not say if anyone had been injured. His approach is more aggressive than most, but Mr Yang's problem is a common one. Anger over property confiscation is one of the leading causes of unrest in China, with many people forced to give up homes and land to make way for anything from roads to luxury villas. Mr Yang said the local government had offered him 130,000 yuan (£13,000) for his fields, on which they want to erect "de...

Wall Street Journal Editorial: Does restricting "eminent domain" -- the power of government to seize private property -- harm economic growth? A new report from the Institute for Justice looks at the evidence and concludes the answer is no. Since the Supreme Court sanctified eminent domain on behalf of private developers in the dreadful 5-4 Kelo ruling in 2005, 42 states have passed some restriction on the practice. Some reforms have been far-reaching, as in Florida, which barred public entities that seized property from transferring it to private hands for 10 years after the seizure. Other reforms are more modest, changing the definition of "blight" or throwing up other obstacles to overeager planners. But one constant since Kelo v. New London has been the refrain, echoed by developers and politicians alike, that eminent domain is necessary for redevelopment. In 2006, Iowa Governor Tom Vilsack vetoed an eminent-domain reform, arguing that it would harm the eco...