Archive for the ‘Politics’ Category

Political issue of the year

Every year, actually

Market Anarchy #2

Hello folks! Welcome to the second edition of Market Anarchy, the only blog carnival for anarcho-capitalists and lovers of freedom. We have an awesome issue today packed with fantastic articles, so without further ado lets get started.

Since we do not normally have a set theme for the carnivals just about any topic related to MA is up for grabs. This issue we have a variety of topics covered and I present them in no particular order.

– We start off with Sholom over at Anarcho-Judaism, who writes this interesting piece comparing Moses to Marxism.

– Greg Gauthier from Doing Philosophy writes a foundational article entitled Anarchy: The New Middle Way. “Our goal, as anarchists, therefore, is to reestablish the primacy of the individual over the ideal, as the only effective means for ending war, terror, and oppression. To do this effectively, we must ground our individualism not in the relativistic nihilism of the liberal left, or the fanatical crusaderism of the absolutist right, but to ground it in the rational, material, empirically real world, that already exists right at the center of our very lives.”

– Greg Swann over at Zillow.com reminds us that working for free is not a crime, but some socialists out there want to make it a crime. “The human mind cannot be outlawed. But the less-gutless champions of Socialism have demonstrated repeatedly that you sure can pile up a whole lot of corpses trying to outlaw the human mind.”

– Francois Tremblay at Check Your Premises unmuddles the mess that is the “rights” issue and especially as it pertains to animals. “Statists often confuse rights with moral obligation. Rights do provide moral obligation, but they are not, by far, the only kind of moral obligation we recognize as valid. I do not recognize the right of any non-human animal to be treated ‘compassionately,’ but that does not mean I go around maiming and goring them. The fact that I do not recognize rights for, say, a dog does not mean that I do not value the dog’s well-being in any way. I have other reasons to value this. A baby has no rights, but this does not mean that babies should be left to starve and die. We have numerous moral reasons to value babies which have nothing to do with rights.”

– Alex Ramos writing from The Freedom To Say 2 + 2 is 4  writes about the hero worship of jack-booted thugs who fight for the State. “By upholding soldiers as virtuous defenders of our rights and freedom, regardless of the actual actions they commit or their absolute subservience to the State, we perpetuate the State’s primary means of keeping us as sheep. If we are not allowed to question whether supporting soldiers is a good thing or not, then we’re going to see more and more immorality coming from the military, command AND grunts.”

– Rick Sincere on Rick Sincere News & Thoughts explains why the current pope, Joseph Ratzinger doesn’t understand basic economics. And why should he? He does have the baby Jesus on his side 😀

– Also on the topic of relgion is Francois Tremblay representing Goosing the Antithesis with his article on how religions struggle against one another and our freedom. “In enforcing a singular value system on the whole of society, the democratic State makes it so there must be victors and losers, and it makes itself the referee. The result of a world where religions are dominated by other religions, as decided by the ruling class, in the name of fear of reprisal and fear of violence is not freedom, or even egalitarianism, but just plain fear. And in these kinds of games, based on coercion and not truth, science and reason have everything to lose.”

– In our first ever tongue-in-cheek article, Robert Bruce  on Escape From Pianosa reminds us that in order to have more equality in this world, we need to have more leisure time. “Finally, I call upon the Congress to establish not one but two oversight committees, so as to ensure that none of this new agency’s actions are ever motivated by politics and a diversity czar to ensure that all people have equal free time, regardless of race, ethnicity, religion, gender, sexual preference, or class.” Is it really satire or does he have a good point? Read the article and find out for yourself.

– Our good friend Aaron Kinney over at The Radical Libertarian discusses his battle with involuntary servitude and how he won.

Finally, we have somebody taking on last issue’s Carnival Freak.

– David Z. at No Third Solution offers a rubtal to why the flat tax is not any better than the other types of extortion.

Now this month we did not recieve any Carnival Freaks but I did get some interesting comments on a mini-blog I maintain on the Bureaucrash.

1.

I’m not quit so sure if anarchism should be the goal here. Minarchism is a more practical realistic solution for as proven previously through out history, anarchism as always failed. Without government to act as a detourent so to speak, men will be engaged into a constant war of all against all. Ayn Rand has also critisised anarcho-capitalism as a disgrace to the libertarian title. “Another leftist discard adopted by the right” is how she put it, and I totally agree. We need a minimal state limited to nothing more than the mear function of protecting our natural rights through the rule of law. For any form of government or social organization that rules through de facto authority is inevitably bound to lead to coruption and tyranny. It is only through de jure authority were the government is limited to the point of only protection and nothing else can a just heirarchy be acheived. The only things government needs to fund are police, courts, and national DEFENSE, not to be confused with offense. Another thing about anarcho-capitalism is wether you agree with it or not, anarcho-capitalism is a form of direct democracy. If a private police department doesn’t at least have a majority to fund it then it will go out of buisness. So if a community composed of mostly mean people don’t want to fund any police departments, then the minority of nice people will be oppressed by the majority. Any form of a social structure that makes laws through will and not nessecity is a tyranny, and thats exactly how anarcho-capitalism works. In a constitutional republic, people are garanteed to be protected by miranda rights or search warrents. Thats the reason our founding fathers gave us a republic and not a democracy, because they wanted the rights of the minority protected from the de facto authority of the majority. In a direct democracy, the minority can have his/her property voted away from them wether they like it or not. Republics protect every body from ever being stuck in a situation like that in the first place so nobody is tyranized. There is honestly nothing wrong with a minimal state and it is alot more desirable of a system to strive for than an anarchy. It scares me that some people actually think that all they have to do is abolish government and all their worries are over. Let me tell you, if it were that easy don’t you think some country or grouping of people somewhere on this planet would have started a market anarchism already? they haven’t becaue they always failed. There were anonymous examples like Somalia and Icelandic common wealth, however both systems failed because they plumited into a state of chaos and wound up having some new form of government being imposed upon them insted of being made for them. Abolishing government is not the answer, limiting it is.

2.

Agreed, MWYN.

I told a friend of mine that I was a libertarian.

He started berating me on my political choice. I asked him, “Why are you so uncomfortable?” He told me “I don’t believe in a world without speed limits! Anarchist!”

 Anarchy is a dirty word…and most often linked to Libertarians like myself. I’m sick of hearing about it. Why doesn’t the word “capitalism” leap into the mind when one is thinking about extremist freedom groups? Capitalism is an economic state. Anarchy is a political state. Carl Marx made the dangerous mistake of crossing the two, and look where he left us. Anarchy is just the flip-side of his socialist coin.

Don’t get me wrong though – the FCC can go. Right now. No more communication legislation!

And there are some other comments on there as well if you’d like to take a look. If anybody would like to offer a rebuttle to any of the comments above you may do so at any of the upcoming carnival issues.

That will be all for this month. I would like to thank all the above writers for contributing to this carnival. Remember, carnival issues come out every month on the 29th and you can submit an article at any time.

We are gradually growing as more writers are signing up for this wonderful carnival. This is the best place to showcase your contributions to freedom. Issue #3 will be over at Hellbound Alleee on May 29th, so keep an eye out on that blog for further info.

The Morality Test.

I recently made my debut on YouTube with a video talking about the Morality Test. Francois Tremblay and one other person came up with the test. I just thought I would post it in video form to help spread it around. Watch the video below and let me know what you think. You can answer the questions in the comments section if you would like.

Continue reading

Why I Detest Donkeys & Elephants

Howdy folks. I decided to display more tallented writings from my friend Ken here. Anytime I post somebody’s article it is from either a message board, personal correspondance, website article, or other. Today we are going to talk about the groups informally known as elephants and donkeys and formally as the two gangs comprised of lawyers, con-artists, and thugs competing with one another to operate a protection racket, as well as other wannabe rulers *cough* minarchists *cough*.  Enjoy and leave a comment.

Continue reading

Why The State Sucks: A Parable

Howdy folks! It has been a long time since I last posted here. I am currently busy with some stuff offline but I thought I would drop a gem that my friend Ken sent to me. First a little preamble rant and then a parable. See if you can figure out what each character represents:

Continue reading

The Perils of Obedience by Stanley Milgram

soldier.jpg

I came across this article a while ago, then forgot about it. Now, rediscovered, I thought I’d share it with you.

It really is a primer on how politics work. Separate responsibility from action and people will kill for you.

Although I wonder if it’s contingent on our current circumstances, or if indeed it’s a flaw of human nature. All you can do is judge for yourself:

http://home.swbell.net/revscat/perilsOfObedience.html

Obedience is as basic an element in the structure of social life as one can point to. Some system of authority is a requirement of all communal living, and it is only the person dwelling in isolation who is not forced to respond, with defiance or submission, to the commands of others. For many people, obedience is a deeply ingrained behavior tendency, indeed a potent impulse overriding training in ethics, sympathy, and moral conduct.

Does Power Corrupt?

“Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” – Lord Acton

This has become a cliche of our age. But why not set the matter on its head?
Let’s just take politicians. What is more true: that the power they acquired has made them corrupt, or that they have been corrupt enough to seek a career in politics? Doesn’t political power, in fact, reveal the nature of the already inherent corruption, rather than create it?

Something to think about…

Reality Bites

Originality has no limits. Meet XKCD

beliefs_thumb.jpg

More HERE

Politicians Lie – What a Surprise!

Statist media is always entertaining. And how much more when I woke up this morning with a picture of the Hungarian Public Television in flames. Right there on EuroNews, in all its glory.

Unfortunately, no politicians were harmed during this footage.

“We f***ed up. Not a little, a lot,” Gyurcsany was heard saying. “No European country has done something as boneheaded as we have.”

“I almost died when for a year and a half we had to pretend we were governing. Instead, we lied morning, evening and night,” he told his fellow Socialists.

With a public deficit running at 10% of GDP, and a burgeoning welfare state, Hungary is not in an envyable position right now. If this is “pretended” governance, I shudder to think what real, meaningful governance looks like.

If the Social Contract Were Real

From: (A T Furman)

Newsgroups: ba.politics

Subject: Re: Social contract?

Date: 14 May 92 08:53:22 GMT

 

We’ve all heard of the “Social Contract” — the unwritten agreement between individuals and “society” (i.e. the government.) The following is an attempt to write down, once and for all, just what the contract is that we’ve all supposedly agreed to.

 

SOCIAL CONTRACT

Between an individual and the United States Government

 

WHEREAS I wish to reside on the North American continent, and WHEREAS the United States Government controls the area of the continent on which I wish to reside, and WHEREAS tacit or implied contracts are vague and therefore unenforceable,

 

I agree to the following terms:

 

SECTION 1: I will surrender a percentage of my property to the Government. The actual percentage will be determined by the Government and will be subject to change at any time. The amount to be surrendered may be based on my income, the value of my property, the value of my purchases or any other criteria the Government chooses. To aid the Government in determining the percentage, I will apply for a Government identification number that I will use in all my major financial transactions.

 

SECTION 2: Should the Government demand it, I will surrender my liberty for a period of time determined by the government and typically no shorter than two years. During that time, I will serve the Government in any way it chooses, including military service in which I may be called upon to sacrifice my life.

 

SECTION 3: I will limit my behavior as demanded by the government. I will consume only those drugs permitted by the Government. I will limit my sexual activities to those permitted by the Government. I will forsake religious beliefs that conflict with the Government’s determination of propriety. More limits may be imposed at any time.

 

SECTION 4: In consideration for the above, the Government will permit me to find employment, subject to limits that will be determined by the Government. These limits may restrict my choice of career or the wages I may accept.

 

SECTION 5: The Government will permit me to reside in the area of North America which it controls. Also, the Government will permit me to speak freely, subject to limits determined by the Government’s Congress and Supreme Court.

 

SECTION 6: The Government will attempt to protect my life and my claim to the property it has allowed me to keep. I agree not to hold the Government liable if it fails to protect me or my property.

 

SECTION 7: The Government will offer various services to me. The nature and extent of these services will be determined by the Government and are subject to change at any time.

 

SECTION 8: The Government will determine whether I may vote for certain Government officials. The influence of my vote will vary inversely with the number of voters, and I understand that it typically will be minuscule. I agree not to hold any elected Government officials liable for acting against my best interests or for breaking promises, even if those promises motivated me to vote for them.

 

SECTION 9: I agree that the Government may hold me fully liable if I fail to abide by the above terms. In that event, the Government may confiscate any property that I have not previously surrendered to it, and may imprison me for a period of time to be determined by the Government. I also agree that the Government may alter the terms of this contract at any time.

 

_____________________________

Signature

 

_____________________________

Date

 

 

Copyright 1989 by Robert E. Alexander.

May be distributed freely.


(taken from here, also posted here )