tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-67413302439791054362024-03-05T18:28:24.036-05:00Neil's BlogAnonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14408794074799022329noreply@blogger.comBlogger59125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6741330243979105436.post-69202560106264257492013-02-13T12:50:00.000-05:002013-02-13T12:50:50.401-05:00Why Agorism is on the Radical Left<!--[if !mso]>
<style>
v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style>
<![endif]--><br />
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
<o:AllowPNG/>
</o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:TrackMoves/>
<w:TrackFormatting/>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:DoNotPromoteQF/>
<w:LidThemeOther>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther>
<w:LidThemeAsian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian>
<w:LidThemeComplexScript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
<w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/>
<w:EnableOpenTypeKerning/>
<w:DontFlipMirrorIndents/>
<w:OverrideTableStyleHps/>
</w:Compatibility>
<m:mathPr>
<m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/>
<m:brkBin m:val="before"/>
<m:brkBinSub m:val="--"/>
<m:smallFrac m:val="off"/>
<m:dispDef/>
<m:lMargin m:val="0"/>
<m:rMargin m:val="0"/>
<m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/>
<m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/>
<m:intLim m:val="subSup"/>
<m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/>
</m:mathPr></w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" DefUnhideWhenUsed="true"
DefSemiHidden="true" DefQFormat="false" DefPriority="99"
LatentStyleCount="267">
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="0" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Normal"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="heading 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 9"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 9"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="35" QFormat="true" Name="caption"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="10" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Title"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" Name="Default Paragraph Font"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="11" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtitle"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="22" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Strong"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="20" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="59" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Table Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Placeholder Text"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="No Spacing"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Revision"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="34" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="List Paragraph"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="29" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Quote"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="30" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Quote"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="19" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="21" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="31" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="32" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="33" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Book Title"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="37" Name="Bibliography"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" QFormat="true" Name="TOC Heading"/>
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
</style>
<![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1030"/>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1"/>
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh5HHpVojv1b-lTwNg3AxTXvSTv8A91UHY6NClNudizCZUtk5CVvUdGatFpV72aAvup-d-5BURYmEuFkKMsDz-yrA0gvJ_ab7AZSk9BydsaNnga2C718d-rKQoBk3HHoR0UkRU8Fc1OSz0-/s1600/Agorist+Class+Theory+February+12+2013.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh5HHpVojv1b-lTwNg3AxTXvSTv8A91UHY6NClNudizCZUtk5CVvUdGatFpV72aAvup-d-5BURYmEuFkKMsDz-yrA0gvJ_ab7AZSk9BydsaNnga2C718d-rKQoBk3HHoR0UkRU8Fc1OSz0-/s200/Agorist+Class+Theory+February+12+2013.png" width="149" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But the truth
remains: today, Marxism is bankrupt. On the Left, faith is gone, morale is low,
and activism is paralyzed<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">. The Left
needs a new ideology to supplant its failed and discredited Marxism.</b>
Agorism—the purest, most consistent, and revolutionary form of
libertarianism—is that supplanting ideology. Agorism can motivate and direct
the underclass’s struggle against the overclass—and <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">return the Left to its radical anti-state, anti-war, pro-property,
pro-market historical roots.</b> (<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Agorist
Class Theory, </i>10/38, emphasis mine)</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjlhndgU2Y7HtvnLMe8a8RkEwYnPuXbBYcaJcUQ3ToiV2KnR0PWU3zdmQK-p5Nm7ePwCAr_wpEojSg57FJnEfSP86eSP1Ekic2RJLGVl6mEzMPkhMIhJD7m2Bg0vYZtQQmpMg9HVOlsxOhO/s1600/The+Movement+of+the+Libertarian+Left+MLL+Black+Flag+Anarchism.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjlhndgU2Y7HtvnLMe8a8RkEwYnPuXbBYcaJcUQ3ToiV2KnR0PWU3zdmQK-p5Nm7ePwCAr_wpEojSg57FJnEfSP86eSP1Ekic2RJLGVl6mEzMPkhMIhJD7m2Bg0vYZtQQmpMg9HVOlsxOhO/s200/The+Movement+of+the+Libertarian+Left+MLL+Black+Flag+Anarchism.png" width="198" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“Left,” from earliest
political times, has meant <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">“anti-establishment.”</b>
Consistent libertarians wish to abolish the State and its parasitic class of
bureaucrats, politicians, subsidized businessmen, privileged labor leaders, and
military mass murderers. This puts us, in most political lexicons, on the Left;<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"> since it is anarchist, it places us on the
Far Left.</b> (<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Introducing the Movement
of the Libertarian Left</i>, emphasis mine)</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
To speak of the “Left” and its inescapable cousin the “Right”
is to invite the knee-jerk reaction of, “well, haven’t you heard of the
left-right paradigm?” Don’t you know that the two major political parties, the
Republicans on the “Right” and the Democrats on the “Left” in the United
States, are effectively two-sides of the same coin? There is no choice; it is
all an illusion of choice. The Left/Right concept is just theater for the
masses who are supposed to root for their favorite politician/gladiator in the
televised or YouTube broadcasted “arena” in our metaphorical Colosseum. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Now it is true that agorist literature <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">does</i> speak of two major divisions within the ruling class—the Left
and Right “wings”—and it <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">does</i> lament
the fact that a change in political party does not normally lead to any
substantive earthshattering change to the overall trends of an era.
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
With regard to the former, Roderick T. Long in his <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Can We Escape the Ruling Class</i> speaks of
this phony Left/Right dichotomy by noting that most ruling classes split into a
<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">political/bureaucratic</i> or “Left” wing
and a <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">corporate/plutocratic</i> or
“Right” wing:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
Most ruling classes are divided
into two broad factions, which we may call the <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">political</i> class and the <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">corporate</i>
class….In the United States today, each of the two major political parties
works…to advanced the interests of <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">both</i>
wings of the ruling class—but the Democrats tend to lean more toward the
Bureaucrats, while the Republicans lean more to the Plutocrats. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhwfvxArZt0ySJdPGkPJ1X2BbMfMR7uvmBgo-Gk7Zf1yfeu8UuKpPH_fDDv2xuqwK1pi9PSDH-sbXfwgCfPmWUQ-HrcDXn_aW6eKriFtiyJ4MXBt_TY9xWnC-RQIql9n6wVIW8bAhUWaREY/s1600/Kodos+voting+thing+kang+versus+kodos.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhwfvxArZt0ySJdPGkPJ1X2BbMfMR7uvmBgo-Gk7Zf1yfeu8UuKpPH_fDDv2xuqwK1pi9PSDH-sbXfwgCfPmWUQ-HrcDXn_aW6eKriFtiyJ4MXBt_TY9xWnC-RQIql9n6wVIW8bAhUWaREY/s400/Kodos+voting+thing+kang+versus+kodos.jpg" width="341" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
With regard to the
latter, one favorite Left revisionist historian often cited by agorist writers,
Gabriel Kolko, (see for instance <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Agorist
Class Theory, </i>18/38), begins his important contribution to American
Progressive Era history, called <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The
Triumph of Conservatism,</i> by lamenting the fact that changing political
parties does not lead to a change in overall governmental policy direction. He
writes, concerning this period of supposedly “progressive” American history,
that “the movements for legislative enactments <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">ran through nearly</b> <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">all the
administrations,</b> and can only be really understood in that context” (9). A
few pages earlier he mentions that “the major political leaders of the
Progressive Era—Roosevelt, Taft, and Wilson—were sufficiently conservative to
respond to their [i.e., corporate] initiatives” (5). Now the Taft and Roosevelt
administrations were Republican while the Wilson administration was Democratic.
So the same general theme of legislating to protect corporate interests from
instability ran across <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">both</i>
Republican and Democratic administrations. Even in his day, Democratic Wilson
got called out for sounding just like a Republican: “to the obvious criticism
that this [Wilson’s speech] sounded very much like Rooseveltian doctrine,
Wilson frankly responded…<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">I can’t see
what the difference is”</b> (207). </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>But this leads me to
a question that I asked myself a short time ago. If the Left/Right paradigm is
just a fraudulent scam—and agorists <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">know</i>
that it is a scam—then why does their literature make such a big deal about
them being “radically Left”? <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Why not
disassociate oneself from this compromised terminology? </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
To answer this question, notice how the agorists phrase
their “radical Left” literature. They do <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">not
</i>say that they want to be “Left” in any modern sense of the term; rather,
they say that they want to <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">return to the
historical roots of the “Left.”</b> Consequently, I went on a historical
investigation of the political term “Left” to see if I could dig up anything
germane. In this article I plan to briefly state what I think the agorists are
alluding to when they use the term “Left.” I then plan to write subsequent
articles to fill-in the details. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I stumbled across a book entitled <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Illuminati: Manifesto of World Revolution (1792)</i> in the course of
my research.<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"> </i>The author is Nicholas
Bonneville. Marco Di Luchetti is the translator, editor, and introduction
writer. This book is of supreme interest because it <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">“allows a correct identification of the ideology of the group known in
history as the Brissotins.”</b> The Brissotins are relevant to my discussion
because <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">they <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">were</i> the first group in history to be called “Left”:</b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhiEiywFLeqQt3IyKtD2I8ra9BDRF9VJggg2K7k_A34EPGm8UECLMDMqsvbcdyGAETZEfdonjCDvL-4jd7CXcv0co5UEtufEvzetSTsYuWsHREl_L_eHY2WBCiPfouLR13xcRrX4GMPI5_t/s1600/Illuminati+Manifesto+of+World+Revolution.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhiEiywFLeqQt3IyKtD2I8ra9BDRF9VJggg2K7k_A34EPGm8UECLMDMqsvbcdyGAETZEfdonjCDvL-4jd7CXcv0co5UEtufEvzetSTsYuWsHREl_L_eHY2WBCiPfouLR13xcRrX4GMPI5_t/s1600/Illuminati+Manifesto+of+World+Revolution.jpg" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
It was during Brissot’s mastery
over the Jacobins from 1791 to August 1792 that Jacobin deputies in
the Assembly began the practice of seating themselves to the left of the
President’s Chair. Gradually, this behavior caused others to spot a “left” and
“right” wing. This behavior is the genesis of our modern distinction of “left”
and “right.” </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
The Brissotins were the first to be
called left-wing politicians. (Kindle Locations 226-229, 235)</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
My thesis is: when the agorist authors refer to their
“historical roots” in the “radical Left,” they mean, in part, roots in the
ideology of the Brissotins. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I plan to expand upon this statement in Part 2. I want to
assure you that I am not doing crazy “conspiracy theory” research. This is
serious historical research on the French Revolution. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
To lure you into reading Part 2, let me very briefly hint at
the similarities between radical “Left” agorism and the Brissotin ideology.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u>Brissotin
Political Philosophy:</u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Bonneville wanted to create a world “without any state to
rule over the people. It was utterly libertarian” (Kindle Locations 133).</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u>Brissotin
Economics:</u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
In 1793, the Cercle Social [the
Brissotins were all members of Bonneville’s Cercle Social] specifically
endorsed giving freedom to farmers to sell their goods at market prices... It
was only during the Enlightenment that experiments were made to let
individuals, unrestrained by state intervention, freely supply markets. When
monarchical state controls were removed, supply flourished. When reimposed,
supply contracted. (See Kindle Locations 276-281)</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14408794074799022329noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6741330243979105436.post-37990821982670971382013-01-31T18:50:00.000-05:002013-01-31T18:50:45.101-05:00Agorism in Wales<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgqSRVQ5lybhmpRBEqZWmhtjrtO5eBcUr4z7H-FWsOAA02bUQ-3BaV2MoPIR3ZOEl2_RIrU2OFpo6CtZx0P8fj43_e1oOgVqhUarRXuyD0piJFmYEUDIcF5h0y6N-ps2qzyRUsQG55H7Jn7/s1600/Flag+of+Wales.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="273" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgqSRVQ5lybhmpRBEqZWmhtjrtO5eBcUr4z7H-FWsOAA02bUQ-3BaV2MoPIR3ZOEl2_RIrU2OFpo6CtZx0P8fj43_e1oOgVqhUarRXuyD0piJFmYEUDIcF5h0y6N-ps2qzyRUsQG55H7Jn7/s400/Flag+of+Wales.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
<o:AllowPNG/>
</o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
</xml><![endif]--><br />
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:TrackMoves/>
<w:TrackFormatting/>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:DoNotPromoteQF/>
<w:LidThemeOther>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther>
<w:LidThemeAsian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian>
<w:LidThemeComplexScript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
<w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/>
<w:EnableOpenTypeKerning/>
<w:DontFlipMirrorIndents/>
<w:OverrideTableStyleHps/>
</w:Compatibility>
<m:mathPr>
<m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/>
<m:brkBin m:val="before"/>
<m:brkBinSub m:val="--"/>
<m:smallFrac m:val="off"/>
<m:dispDef/>
<m:lMargin m:val="0"/>
<m:rMargin m:val="0"/>
<m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/>
<m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/>
<m:intLim m:val="subSup"/>
<m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/>
</m:mathPr></w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" DefUnhideWhenUsed="true"
DefSemiHidden="true" DefQFormat="false" DefPriority="99"
LatentStyleCount="267">
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="0" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Normal"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="heading 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 9"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 9"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="35" QFormat="true" Name="caption"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="10" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Title"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" Name="Default Paragraph Font"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="11" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtitle"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="22" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Strong"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="20" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="59" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Table Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Placeholder Text"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="No Spacing"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Revision"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="34" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="List Paragraph"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="29" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Quote"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="30" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Quote"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="19" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="21" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="31" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="32" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="33" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Book Title"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="37" Name="Bibliography"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" QFormat="true" Name="TOC Heading"/>
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
Every so often I make a truly serendipitous discovery, which
nicely illustrates the idea of agorism in practice. My purpose in this article
is to demonstrate how a bunch of Welsh non-conformists behaved in a manner very
similar to that of modern day agorists. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Agorism has been described as: “the purest, most consistent,
and revolutionary form of libertarianism. It can motivate and direct the
underclass’s struggle against the overclass.” But how does one go about
“motivating” and “directing” this struggle by the underclass to overthrow the
overclass or ruling class? The agorist model is based on a <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">non-violent resistance model, </b>or what Benjamin R Tucker, the famous
American individualist anarchist, calls <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">passive
resistance. </b>Your modern day agorist would substitute the term <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">counter-economics</b> for <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">passive resistance;</b> nevertheless, the
idea remains similar across time. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Counter-economics has been defined as follows: “All
non-coercive human action committed in defiance of the State constitutes the
Counter-Economy.” For the purposes of this article, I am going to limit myself
to one aspect of the counter-economy, namely tax resistance against unjust
laws. This is based on what Tucker calls “starving out Uncle Sam,” i.e.,
starving the parasitic state of resources by cutting it off from the flow of
tax dollars. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The idea is certainly not new. For example, in Murray N
Rothbard’s introduction to Étienne de la Boétie’s book <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The Discourse of Voluntary Servitude,</i> we see this idea being
offered up in the year 1575:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
The call for mass civil
disobedience was picked up by one of the more radical of the later Huguenot
pamphlets, La France Turquie (1575), which advocated an association of towns
and provinces <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">for the purpose of
refusing to pay all taxes to the State.</b> (18, bold emphasis mine)</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
What I found so fascinating is that Tucker, an American
anarchist, when questioned about his idea to “starve out Uncle Sam,” responded to
his critic by citing a historical example from Wales. Tucker, writing in an
article called <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><a href="http://flag.blackened.net/daver/anarchism/tucker/tucker15.html">Passive
Resistance,</a></i> states that</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
the Balfour-clerical education
bill, a reactionary measure, has largely been <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">nullified in Wales</b> by the <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">refusal
of its opponents to pay the school rates.</b> (bold emphasis mine)</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The story is rooted in an ongoing dispute between the Church
of England and the Nonconformists. The nonconformists were still Christians
because they were members of different Protestant denominations; however, they
were <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">not</b> members of the Church of
England. Most of the Nonconformists lived in the manufacturing areas and in
Wales. I looked through an article on the Nonconformists, which you can access <a href="http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/REnonconformists.htm">here</a>. It seems
to me that the Nonconformists launched their tax resistance campaign because of
the State’s plan for them to pay Anglican taxes:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<ul style="margin-top: 0in;" type="disc">
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1;">The Nonconformists did not
believe in the teachings of the Church of England, i.e., they did not want
to be forced to pay for something that they did not believe in</li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1;">They complained about
taxation without representation, i.e., they felt very underrepresented on
the school board</li>
</ul>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
With regard to the first objection, we read that “since the
Anglicans had the great majority of church schools, Nonconformists argued that
they would have to pay for religious education they believed was false.” </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
With regard to the second objection, about taxation without
fair representation, the April 14, 1904 speech by Joseph Rice to the East
Grinstead Urban Council provides a nice illustration. Rice mentions that the
previous arrangement was fair, but the new arrangement discriminates against
the Nonconformists in favor of the Church of England:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
for over 20 years, East Grinstead
had a School Board in town and Churchman and Nonconformists <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">were fairly represented on it.</b> </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Now,</b> gentlemen from Lewes, who know nothing about the circumstances
of East Grinstead have appointed Robert Whitehead. The Committee, as chosen by
the County Council, consisted of five churchmen and one Free Churchman, <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">one-sixth only of the representation for
Nonconformists,</b> though <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">450 of the
800 children</b> in the Board Schools had <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Nonconformist
parents. </b>(bold emphasis mine)</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In other words, the Nonconformists have one-sixth or 16.67%
of the votes; however, 56.25% (450 of 800) of the children come from
Nonconformist families. So the Nonconformists feel as though they are getting
underrepresented. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
As a result of these grievances, “John Clifford formed the
National Passive Resistance Committee and by 1906 <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">over 170 Nonconformists had gone to prison for refusing to pay their
school taxes”</b> (bold emphasis mine). Our early twentieth century agorists in
Wales suffered “numbers of prosecutions, seizures of goods, imprisonment, and
disfranchisement” as reported <a href="http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/search/detailmini.jsp?_nfpb=true&_&ERICExtSearch_SearchValue_0=EJ423724&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=no&accno=EJ423724">here.</a>
As the <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/wales/history/sites/themes/guide/ch16_part2_religion_19th_and_20th_centuries.shtml">BBC
Wales History</a> reports, “disestablishment became a distinctly Welsh national
cause.” </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Despite their attempt to overthrow the Balfour Education Act
by refusing to pay their taxes and by going to prison in protest over the tax,
“no change to the law was made.” It did lead to the Conservatives being
overthrown in the next election as mentioned <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balfour_Education_Act#cite_note-6">here.</a><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The new Liberal government of 1906 attempted
to repeal the earlier Balfour Act of 1902 but ran into problems in the House of
Lords. See <a href="http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/REclifford.htm">here.</a>
Consequently, I am not sure why Benjamin Tucker “declared victory” by boldly
asserting that the tax resisters led to the “nullification” of the Balfour Act.
Maybe, I can only guess at this point, he is referring to the fact that, as
reported by the BBC Wales History article, “in 1920, after many vicissitudes,
the Anglican Church in Wales was disestablished.” </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
As a young agorist research, I thoroughly enjoyed finding a
non-American example of a tax resister campaign executed in real life. Actually,
I worry that there are not enough examples in more recent history, at least not
documented. Or maybe I am just not aware of them yet. Prior to this discovery,
I only knew of one fairly recent tax resister campaign in Connecticut and it
was more of a local campaign. I hope that my future research will find more
examples of tax resister campaigns in action. I am curious to see if I can
conclude something about an overall success rate of this non-violent tactic.</div>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14408794074799022329noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6741330243979105436.post-41832220931357684692013-01-26T13:52:00.001-05:002013-01-26T13:52:31.001-05:00Antiharmonism and the Betrayal of Liberty<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
<o:AllowPNG/>
</o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
</xml><![endif]--></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: left;">
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:TrackMoves/>
<w:TrackFormatting/>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:DoNotPromoteQF/>
<w:LidThemeOther>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther>
<w:LidThemeAsian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian>
<w:LidThemeComplexScript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
<w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/>
<w:EnableOpenTypeKerning/>
<w:DontFlipMirrorIndents/>
<w:OverrideTableStyleHps/>
</w:Compatibility>
<m:mathPr>
<m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/>
<m:brkBin m:val="before"/>
<m:brkBinSub m:val="--"/>
<m:smallFrac m:val="off"/>
<m:dispDef/>
<m:lMargin m:val="0"/>
<m:rMargin m:val="0"/>
<m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/>
<m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/>
<m:intLim m:val="subSup"/>
<m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/>
</m:mathPr></w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" DefUnhideWhenUsed="true"
DefSemiHidden="true" DefQFormat="false" DefPriority="99"
LatentStyleCount="267">
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="0" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Normal"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="heading 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 9"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 9"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="35" QFormat="true" Name="caption"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="10" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Title"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" Name="Default Paragraph Font"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="11" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtitle"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="22" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Strong"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="20" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="59" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Table Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Placeholder Text"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="No Spacing"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Revision"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="34" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="List Paragraph"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="29" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Quote"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="30" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Quote"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="19" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="21" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="31" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="32" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="33" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Book Title"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="37" Name="Bibliography"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" QFormat="true" Name="TOC Heading"/>
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
</style>
<![endif]--><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">No! To tell you the truth, I’m never voting again. Like marriage, no
matter who you choose it turns out bad. Unless you’re rich. They get everything
they want—well, fine! One thing I know: we’re never going to win through the
system. Voting has never been the American way.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></i></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></i>–Al Bundy, the “Chicago Wine Party” episode of <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Married with Children</i>
</div>
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiD1TPtyiLQ87qWqz7glYRL77Q0P3LtiQDpCzPc64tYgwS-9sBiUot_i-7MJtC2ou9GEQ57M-LSUO1H182OpHk9zoGnoyoj98Q-ZsjUW7Dw4YqeZHRDTM-JcqoP3OfyCOCpWzVPK3NX-Re1/s1600/Al+Bundy+1.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="239" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiD1TPtyiLQ87qWqz7glYRL77Q0P3LtiQDpCzPc64tYgwS-9sBiUot_i-7MJtC2ou9GEQ57M-LSUO1H182OpHk9zoGnoyoj98Q-ZsjUW7Dw4YqeZHRDTM-JcqoP3OfyCOCpWzVPK3NX-Re1/s320/Al+Bundy+1.JPG" width="320" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
In the introduction to the Mises Institute’s edition of
Ludwig von Mises’s <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Theory and History, </i>the
introductory preface contains Rothbard’s lament: “Austrian economics will never
enjoy a genuine renaissance until economists read and absorb the vital lessons
of this unfortunately neglected work (xix). Unfortunately for Rothbard, I think
that Mises’s <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Theory and History’s</i> discussion
regarding the so called <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">“philosophy of
antiharmonism”</i> undercuts Rothbard’s argument in favor of voting and
engaging in political action as expressed in <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The Ethics of Liberty</i> (186-87). It seems to me that attempts to
bring about liberty “through the system” or “through government” can rather
easily backfire on the libertarians.
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Let me begin by presenting Mises’s treatment of the <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">philosophy of antiharmonism:</i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
As the antiharmonists see it,
community of interests exists <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">only
within</b> the group among its members. The interests of each group and of each
of its members are implacably opposed to those of all other groups and of each
of their members. So it is “natural” there should be perpetual war among
various groups. This natural state of war of each group against every other
group may sometimes be interrupted by periods of armistice, falsely labeled
periods of peace. It may also happen that sometimes in warfare <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">a group cooperates in alliances with other
groups.</b> Such alliances are temporary makeshifts of politics. They do <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">not</b> in the long run affect the
inexorable natural conflicts of interest. <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Having,
in cooperation with some allied groups, defeated several of the hostile groups,
the leading group in the coalition turns against its previous allies in order
to annihilate them too and to establish its own world supremacy. </b>(Liberty
Fund’s Edition of <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Theory and History, </i>28,
bold emphasis mine)</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Initially, I thought that I could explain this passage using
the “bad/super-bad” explanation (maybe one could call this the “McLovin
Conjecture” because of the “super-bad” component) provided by Étienne de la Boétie
in his book <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The Politics of Obedience: The
Discourse of Voluntary Servitude. </i>La Boétie mentions that within our ruling
class we have a group of “favorites” (the bad) who form an alliance with the
“tyrant” (the super-bad); however, this alliance is only ephemeral in nature
because the “favorites” end up losing both their fortunes and their lives to
the “super-bad” tyrant:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
These favorites should not recall
so much the memory of those who have won great wealth from tyrants as of those
who, after they had for some time amassed it, have lost to him their property
as well as their lives; they should consider not how many others have gained a
fortune, but rather how few of them have kept it….Most often, after becoming
rich by despoiling others, under the favor of his protection, they find
themselves at last enriching him with their own spoils. (75)</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But then I asked myself, <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">what
if</i> instead of conceiving of the antiharmonist philosophy in terms of
“bad/super-bad,” one were to consider it in terms of <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">“good</b> <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">and super-bad.”</b> After
all, if Fogell or McLovin stands for <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">“super-bad,”</b>
because he bought the alcohol with his fake I.D. and because he went on a wild
joy ride with the out-of-control police officers, then I suppose it is safe to say
that Evan’s character in the movie stands for <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">“good,”</b> because Evan was the responsible and mature one in the
group of friends. But what then does this <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">“Evan-McLovin Interpretation</i></b>” of the
philosophy of antiharmonism imply? <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">I
think that it implies quite simply that libertarians should <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">not</i> try to achieve liberty <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">through the political system.</i></b><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"> </i>Let me now explain how I came to this
conclusion.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In his first ever treatise in the English language, <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism, </i>Hans-Hermann
Hoppe tells us a riveting story that nicely illustrates the “Evan-McLovin
Interpretation” of the philosophy of antiharmonism in action! <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In Hoppe’s rendition of the history of how
absolutism emerged out of feudalism, the <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">“super-bad”</b>
or <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">“McLovin”</b> component of the story is
what he refers to as the creation of <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">“super-feudalism”</b>
out of plain-old vanilla-flavored feudalism. The <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">“good” </b>or <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">“Evan”</b>
component of this saga is played by the heroes of the story, namely, the
inchoate agorists consisting of international traders and merchants who just
happen to be audacious enough to defy the local feudal overlord in their quest
for freedom. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The “Evan” component of traders and merchants forms an
alliance with the “McLovin” component; the “McLovin” component just happens to
be a geographically distant feudal lord. This “Evan-McLovin” alliance
cooperates because it is perceived to be a mutually beneficial arrangement,
namely, both sides will benefit by seeing the local lord overthrown. Without
the existing local lord, the “Evan” component will benefit from this alliance
by receiving “partial freedom” from the onerous requirements of feudalism. In
other words, we are about to see the Janus-like nature of “McLovin.” To form
this alliance, “McLovin” puts his best face forward by coming across as
“magnanimous McLovin,” the lord who grants freedom! The “McLovin”
component—this geographically distant feudal lord—benefits from this alliance because
the feudal lord gets to extend his territory of control, at the expense of the
other lord. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Now, following the philosophy of antiharmonism, what is
supposed to come next in our feudal plot line? Naturally, a betrayal of one
member of the alliance by the other member! This is <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">precisely </i>what happens. After the alliance overthrows the existing
local lord, the “McLovin” component proceeds to show the “Evan” component its
other much nastier face. The “McLovin” component earns the title of “super-bad”
at this point by proceeding to transform itself into what Hoppe calls the
“super-feudalist.” What this means is that the “McLovin” component of this tale
betrays the “Evan” component by breaking the promise to grant freedom. Instead,
the exact <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">opposite</i> happens because a
new layer of exploitation is imposed on the “Evan” component. Now the “McLovin”
component has achieved the ultimate goal of the philosophy of antiharmonism. Everyone,
the existing local lord and the merchants and traders (the “Evan” component),
is subjected now to the unquestioned lordship of this new “super-McLovin.” The
alliance of freedom turned into the alliance from hell as everything
retrogressed. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Just in case you think I am making all of this up, let me
give you the stern and academic version of this antiharmonist philosophy story
in the words of Hoppe:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
In their endeavor to free
themselves from the exploitative interventions of the various feudal lords, the
merchants had to look for natural allies. Understandably enough, they found
such allies among those from the class of feudal lords who, though comparatively
more powerful than their noble fellows, had the centers of their power at a
relatively greater distance from the commercial towns seeking assistance. In
aligning themselves with the merchant class, they sought to extend their power
beyond its present range at the expense of other, minor lords. <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">In order to achieve this goal they first
granted certain exemptions from the “normal” obligations falling upon the
subjects</b> <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">of feudal rule</b> to the
rising urban centers, thus assuring their existence <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">as places of partial freedom,</b> and offered protection from the
neighboring feudal powers. <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">But as soon
as the coalition had succeeded in its joint attempt to weaken the local lords
and the merchant towns’ “foreign” feudal ally had thereby become established as
a real power outside of its own traditional territory, it moved ahead and
established itself as a feudal super power,</b> i.e., as a monarchy, with a
king who <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">superimposed his own
exploitative rules onto those of the already existing feudal system.</b>
Absolutism had been born; and as this was nothing but feudalism on a larger
scale, <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">economic decline again set in,
the towns disintegrated, and stagnation and misery returned.</b> (<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism,</i>
86-87, bold emphasis mine)</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
One can further see this “Evan-McLovin Interpretation” of
the philosophy of antiharmonism at work when looking at the history of the
American Revolution. Just like the feudal example above, the American
Revolution saw the emergence of an “Evan-McLovin” alliance against a common
enemy, in this case Great Britain.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The
“Evan” component of the American Revolution was lulled into an alliance with
the “McLovin” component based on promises of liberty and freedom. “Magnanimous
McLovin” makes his return! True to form, the alliance was followed by a
betrayal since the promises of liberty did not materialize. What did
materialize was just the replacement of one tyranny with another. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The nature of the “Evan-McLovin” alliance in the American
Revolution is put tersely by Howard Zinn. The “Evan” component is played by the
“substantial middle class,” and the “McLovin” component is played by the “upper
classes”: </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
Those upper classes, to rule, <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">needed to make concessions to the middle
class,</b> without damage to their own wealth or power, at the expense of
slaves, Indians, and poor whites. <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">This
bought loyalty.</b> And to bind that loyalty with something more powerful even
than material advantage, the ruling group found, in the 1760s and 1770s, a
wonderfully useful device. <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">That device
was the language of liberty and equality, </b>which could <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">unite just enough whites to fight a Revolution</b> against England, <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">without ending either slavery or
inequality. </b>(<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">A People’s History of
the United States,</i> 73-74, bold emphasis mine)</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Just as the alliance feudal lord, the soon to be
“super-McLovin,” promised freedom from the onerous feudal rules but eventually
betrayed his “Evan” component in order to establish an indomitable lordship, so
too the American upper classes, as soon as they got what they wanted, betrayed
their alliance members and successfully established a new indomitable lordship.
What do they, the upper classes, want? Paraphrasing Charles Beard, Zinn states
that “the rich must, in their own interest, either control the government
directly or control the laws by which government operates” (106). One can
really see all of these points coming to a head—the phony liberty alliance
followed by betrayal—by looking at what happened when the Declaration of
Independence was read aloud in Boston:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
When the Declaration of
Independence was read, with all its flaming radical language, from the town
hall balcony in Boston, it was read by Thomas Crafts, a member of the Loyal
Nine group, conservatives <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">who had
opposed militant action</b> against the British. <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Four days after the reading, </b>the Boston Committee of Correspondence
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">ordered the townsmen to show up on the
Common for a military draft.</b> The rich, it turned out, could <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">avoid the draft</b> by paying for
substitutes; the <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">poor had to serve.</b>
This led to rioting, and shouting: <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">“Tyranny
is Tyranny let it come from whom it may.”</b> (<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">A People’s History of the United States, </i>91-92, bold emphasis mine)</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The people of Boston just got “cock-blocked” by “McLovin!” The
alliance was formed under the assumption that it would bring about liberty and
freedom for the “Evan” component. What actually happened is that the philosophy
of antiharmonism kicked in; the “Evan” component was lured in to an alliance
with the “McLovin” component, which just was rendered nugatory. Now the true
face of the “McLovin” component has been revealed to the people causing them to
riot. Not liberty but ordering people into a military draft is that true face.
Not surprisingly, Zinn sagaciously observes, <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">“new lords, new laws.”</b> But the “McLovin” component got what it
wanted. The Declaration of Independence had been read and so the British ruling
class was formally out and the new ruling class was now in charge. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
To conclude, I will be bold enough to state that the
“Evan-McLovin Interpretation” of the philosophy of antiharmonism <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">is probably one of the first lessons
anarchists learned during the French Revolution.</b> In what Peter Marshall
calls “the earliest anarchist manifesto in continental Europe,” we read this
brilliant passage from Jean Varlet’s work:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
What a social monstrosity, what a
masterpiece of Machiavellism [sic] is this revolutionary government. For any
rational being, <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">government and
revolution are incompatible.</b> (<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Demanding
the Impossible: A History of Anarchism,</i> 451, bold emphasis mine)</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
One cannot change the system by working with the government
or ruling class elements, the “McLovins.” That is the point. I have tried to
illustrate that alliances with the “McLovin” component with their promises of
freedom and liberty are nothing but legerdemain, trickery, deception,
prestidigitation, call it whatever you want. The “Evan” component thinking that
it is getting liberty is actually enslaving itself by trying to work with some
government or “McLovin” component. The merchants tried to work with the
geographically distant feudal lord to get freedom but that blew up in their
faces. Similarly, the middle class Americans tried to work with their colonial
rulers in order to win freedom for themselves. “The men who engineered the
revolt were largely members of the colonial ruling class” (<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">A People’s History of the United States,</i> 101). Again, this working
with the government or existing ruling group backfired for the seekers of
liberty in America too. One can find other examples of the preachers of
liberty—the “McLovins” of history—turning into the barons of tyrannical hell
the second they get the opportunity to enslave. They will turn on you in a
heartbeat. One of my books on the French Revolution aptly put it this way:
“Robespierre the apostle of liberty” in 1793 became “Robespierre the most
infamous of tyrants.” Even in classical examples, we again see this betrayal of
the seekers of liberty. The “Evans” of ancient Syracuse formed an alliance with
Denis or Dionysius in order to save their city from the invading Carthaginians.
Like all good McLovin’s, when Dionysius returned to the city victorious over
the invaders, he transformed “himself from captain to king, and then from king
to tyrant” (<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The Politics of Obedience:
The Discourse of Voluntary Servitude,</i> 54-55). </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
So what advice can I offer to Evan and McLovin, the two
movie characters whom I used throughout my article? Well, when you head off to
college next year, maybe that “alliance” plan of living together as roommates should
seriously be reconsidered! Don’t do it Evan! For us, the lesson is don’t work
through the system or with members of the ruling class because there is a high
probability of getting stabbed in the back by the phony “liberty” alliance
member. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiiGIVoWEGIBr_nIv28x5pnlTjvly6UnLvtSlD26mrKcn10VZ5U-Gbh0njHPiDw299W8od39h860KdJ73VZZIxzeBat6zaoER5OGV_ICwpTG-nHe4vMHpuIfvQjmOokcStJz0VwxwPyKCU5/s1600/McLovin+and+Evan.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="216" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiiGIVoWEGIBr_nIv28x5pnlTjvly6UnLvtSlD26mrKcn10VZ5U-Gbh0njHPiDw299W8od39h860KdJ73VZZIxzeBat6zaoER5OGV_ICwpTG-nHe4vMHpuIfvQjmOokcStJz0VwxwPyKCU5/s400/McLovin+and+Evan.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
<o:AllowPNG/>
</o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
</xml><![endif]--><br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14408794074799022329noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6741330243979105436.post-57051774931118673382013-01-18T13:05:00.000-05:002013-01-18T13:05:41.765-05:00Can Atheism Actually be Peaceful and Tolerant?<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
<o:AllowPNG/>
</o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
</xml><![endif]--><br />
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:TrackMoves/>
<w:TrackFormatting/>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:DoNotPromoteQF/>
<w:LidThemeOther>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther>
<w:LidThemeAsian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian>
<w:LidThemeComplexScript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
<w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/>
<w:EnableOpenTypeKerning/>
<w:DontFlipMirrorIndents/>
<w:OverrideTableStyleHps/>
</w:Compatibility>
<m:mathPr>
<m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/>
<m:brkBin m:val="before"/>
<m:brkBinSub m:val="--"/>
<m:smallFrac m:val="off"/>
<m:dispDef/>
<m:lMargin m:val="0"/>
<m:rMargin m:val="0"/>
<m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/>
<m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/>
<m:intLim m:val="subSup"/>
<m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/>
</m:mathPr></w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" DefUnhideWhenUsed="true"
DefSemiHidden="true" DefQFormat="false" DefPriority="99"
LatentStyleCount="267">
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="0" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Normal"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="heading 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 9"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 9"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="35" QFormat="true" Name="caption"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="10" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Title"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" Name="Default Paragraph Font"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="11" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtitle"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="22" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Strong"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="20" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="59" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Table Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Placeholder Text"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="No Spacing"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Revision"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="34" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="List Paragraph"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="29" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Quote"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="30" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Quote"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="19" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="21" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="31" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="32" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="33" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Book Title"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="37" Name="Bibliography"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" QFormat="true" Name="TOC Heading"/>
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u>Background on the
Existing Debate</u></b>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In his book, <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The New
Atheism: Taking a Stand for Science and Reason,</i> Victor J. Stenger mentions
what has become a standard riposte among religious apologists, namely, that
despite the millennia of destruction and evil in the name of Christianity,
these faux pas are trifling and relatively insignificant in comparison to the baleful
nightmares perpetrated in the name of godless atheism. Stenger summarizes the fulmination
against atheism hurled by sociologist Paul Froese: “the Soviet Union waged a
relentless war on religion that he attributed to the ‘violence of atheism’ and,
despite this effort, it failed to eradicate faith.”</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
If the monstrosity of the atheistic Soviet Union wasn’t bad
enough, then, as is habitually pointed out, the world also suffered from
another round of atrocities committed by Adolf Hitler and his allegedly
atheistic Nazi Germany. Hector Avalos, in his article <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Atheism Was Not the Cause of the Holocaust, </i>directly states the
animadversion leveled against the atheists by a popular Christian apologist:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
Dinesh D’Souza is able to charge
atheism in Nazi Germany with some 10 million deaths, including that of 6
million Jews….altogether, D’Souza affirms that these big three atheist regimes
[i.e., Nazi Germany, Stalinist Russia, and Mao Zedong’s China] have killed
about 100 million people. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Avalos interprets D’Souza’s riposte to atheism as simply:
Christianity may be bad, but atheism is a lot worse. “D’Souza is typical of
many Christian apologists whose best response to the genocides committed by
self-described Christians is that atheists have killed even more.”</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Some of the atheist replies to these obloquies are as
follows. Avalos, for example, turns things around by accusing Christianity of
being the actual cause of the Jewish Holocaust in Nazi Germany. “Nazism,
indeed,” writes Avalos, “was very much at home in a long tradition of Christian
anti-Judaism.” My favorite atheist author, Christopher Hitchens, blames these
problems on men getting enraptured with delusions of their own cosmic grandeur.
In his book <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">God is Not Great,</i>
Hitchens claims that “the examples most in common use—those of the Hitler and
Stalin regimes—show us with terrible clarity what can happen when men usurp the
role of gods.” <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It is as if the cosmic
North Korea that Hitchens sporadically fulminates against has descended onto
the earth in the form of these presumptuous madmen. It reminds me of what the
economist Ludwig von Mises wrote in his book <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Planned Chaos</i> about Hitler. Warner Sombart argued that “the Führer
received his orders directly from God, the supreme Führer of the Universe.” Apparently,
tyrannical madmen have a proclivity to hearing voices and edicts from God
himself. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Another defense of atheism that is often mentioned in
discussions of Nazism and atheism is that of heavy Christian church involvement,
which assisted Hitler and Nazism. Even the television Christian evangelist John
C. Hagee in his tendentious work about why the United States ought to be a tool
of the State of Israel points the blame for the Nazi atrocities at the Catholic
Church. Hagee sees the Catholic Church as an interminable and implacable persecutor
of his protagonists, the Jewish people. Writing with alacrity, Hagee says that</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
the world’s finest scholars have
chronicled Hitler’s atrocities toward the Jews….I want you to see that church
policy shaped the policy of the Third Reich. When Hitler signed the Concordant
with the Roman Church, he said, “I am only continuing the work of the Catholic
Church.”</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u>The Plan for this
Article</u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The plan for this article is to explore an alternative
approach to addressing these charges of atheism being an inimical foe to peace,
humanity, and civilization. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I first analyze what the Soviet Union is from an agorist or
free market anarchist point of view. The essential point is that the Soviet
Union is nothing but the <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">monopoly problem</b>
coupled with an attempt to create some sort of <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">godless religion imposed from on high for political purposes.</b> Then
I provide some recommendations for how atheists could go about achieving a
workable atheism in the “real” world so to speak. At the very least, I hope
that my <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">recommendations </b>will provide
atheists with a useful way of defending themselves against apologetic
accusations of the kind that say that atheism leads inevitably to violence and
to tyranny.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u>An Agorist or Free
Market Anarchist Interpretation of the Soviet Union, Its Ideology, and Its Quasi
Religion </u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The most striking comment made by Van Den Bercken is, with
emphasis provided by me, this succinct observation: “The Soviet state is an
ideological monoculture, and that is a modern variation on an old type of
state: <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">the theocracy.”</b> According to
dictionary.com, a theocracy may be defined as “a system of government by
priests claiming a divine commission.” To me it appears as though the Soviet
Union is, in an anarcho-capitalist sense, nothing but a textbook example of the
problem of <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">the divine right of kings.</i>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“The initial article of the young [Gustave de] Molinari,
here translated for the first time as ‘The Production of Security,” writes
Murray N Rothbard, “was the first presentation anywhere in human history of
what is now called ‘anarcho-capitalism’ or ‘free market anarchism.’” And this
story of the young Molinari developing the idea of free market anarchism is
inextricably tied in with the history of the divine right of kings. Molinari writes
so brilliantly and perspicaciously that I feel it would be a crime not to quote
his book, <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The Production of Security,</i>
at length:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
according to this system, which
embodies the will of Providence in certain men and which invests these chosen
ones, these anointed ones with a quasi-divine authority, the subjects evidently
have no rights at all. They must submit, without question, to the decrees of
the sovereign authority, as if they were the decrees of Providence itself.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Now returning to the Soviet Union, Van Den Bercken’s
portrayal of the ruling class certainly sounds similar to an agorist ruling
class theory analysis. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Just as
Molinari’s book querulously attacks <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">the
idea of monopoly</b> both in public and in private versions, so too Van Den
Bercken pinpoints the problem of the Soviet Union’s “ideological dictatorship”
in what he calls an <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">intellectual
monopoly.</b> “The étatistic [i.e., statist] system of values in the Soviet
Union,” he astutely observes, “strives, according to its nature, towards an
intellectual monopoly in society.” This “intellectual monopoly,” just like all
other monopolies such as central banks and public health care provision,
engages in an immutable war against its most truculent adversary, namely
competition. “As an ideological monoculture, the Soviet state cannot recognize
any alternative or competitive ideologies…to do so would mean intellectual pluralism
and the destruction of the essence of Soviet ideology.” In the Rothbardian
analysis found in his book <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The Anatomy of
the State,</i> the ruling class circumvents any restrictions to its power by <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">monopolizing</b> the <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">interpretation function</i>. Speaking with regard to the American
Constitution, Rothbard writes that “the Constitution was designed with checks
and balances to limit any one governmental power and yet had then developed a
Supreme Court with <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">the monopoly of
ultimate interpreting power”</b> (bold emphasis mine). Similarly, in the Soviet
Union, according to Van Den Bercken, the “interest [of the state] is determined
by the <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">political leaders—for it is they
who have the right to interpret the ideology—</b>they also determine the choice
of the means. The state leadership, in addition to being the <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">highest ideological doctrinal authority,</b>
is also the <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">highest moral authority</b>
in the land” (bold emphasis is mine).</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Let me now recapitulate. The Soviet Union is the zenith of
the <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">monopoly problem.</b> I have
stressed a few pertinent examples such as the <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">intellectual monopoly </b>and the <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">interpretation
monopoly; </b>however, it should be trivially obvious that both an <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">economic</b> and a <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">political monopoly</b> existed as well. That is, after all, the essence
of where I am going with this, namely, an all-encompassing dictatorship. The
concluding part mentioned above rather religious sounding terminology such as
“doctrinal” and “moral” with regard to the leadership of the Soviet Union. So
let me close the circle and make clear how the Soviet Union—despite being
atheistic of a very special kind—is actually theocratic by emulating <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">the</i> <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">divine
right of kings</i> issue, which I raised at the beginning of this particular section.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The religious nature of the Soviet Union—this apparent
paradox of an “atheistic religion”—is unexceptionably illustrated by both Van
Den Bercken and by Paul Froese.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>First,
Van Den Bercken states explicitly that Lenin gave a <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">“pseudo-religious character”</b> to his strident anti-religion:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
Since Lenin does not possess
intellectual aloofness with regard to the religious question, his atheism has
that consistently strong rejection of all religions, whether real or symbolic,
theistic or secular, which meant that he was no longer able to see to what
extent <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">he gave a pseudo-religious
character to his own anti-religion.</b> (bold emphasis is mine)</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<br /></div>
To fully appreciate the religious-like nature of the Soviet
system, consider some of the ways in which the Soviet leadership <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">mimicked Christianity,</b> as documented by
Paul Froese in his paper <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Forced
Secularization in Soviet Russia: Why an Atheistic Monopoly Failed.</i> This was
all part of a deliberate campaign: “as the anti-religious campaigns grew, so
did their belief that religion could only be destroyed through a <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">clever replacement”</b> (bold emphasis
mine). I have attempted to succinctly summarize some of the major points where
the Soviet system is behaving like a religion (all bold emphasis is mine).
<br />
<ol>
<li><span style="mso-list: Ignore;"><span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"></span></span>“Red” weddings mimicked religious weddings <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">with Communist officials donning robes and
sanctifying</b> the marriage. In other words, this sounds as if Communist
officials are pretending to be clergy members.<span style="mso-list: Ignore;"> </span></li>
<li><span style="mso-list: Ignore;"><span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"></span></span>They adopted <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">“birth
rituals”</b> in order to mimic the Christian <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">baptism</b> ceremony.</li>
<li><span style="mso-list: Ignore;"><span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"></span></span>There was a <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">godlike
worship </b>of the Communist elite. Many “mistook scientific atheism for <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">a new religion</b> and not an exit from
religious belief altogether so that even those few who wanted to believe in the
ideals of atheistic communism simply ended up <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">praying to the gods of Lenin and Stalin.”</b></li>
<li>The writings of Lenin were treated as <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">sacred text</b> from a prophet and became
the <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">final justification of any act.</b>
This seems to be mimicking the famous line from the pastoral epistle 2 Timothy
3:16, which says that “all scripture is inspired by God.”</li>
<li><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Stalin</b> also
promoted himself as <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">the “Father” of his
people, </b>which seems to be mimicking the idea expressed in, for example,
Philippians 4:20, which says “to our <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">God
and Father</b> be glory forever and ever. Amen.”</li>
<li>Soviets elevated political figures to <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">transcendental status</b> unbecoming the
initial rhetoric of historical materialism. I suspect that this talk of the “transcendental,”
which means “surpassing the natural plane of reality or knowledge, supernatural
or mystical according to dictionary.com, is meant to mimic the idea that Jesus is
supposed to be the supernatural creator of the universe as mentioned in the
prologue to the gospel according to John. </li>
<li>The Knowledge Society introduced a coming-of-age celebration
called the “Summer Days of Youth” intended to <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">mimic and replace church confirmations.</b></li>
<li>Scientific atheists viewed any technology as evidence
of atheism because it demonstrated that <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">humans
could work “miracles”</b> that were not performed by God.</li>
<li>Atheist <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">preachers</b>
held “intellectual <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">revivals</b>”
fashioned after religious revivals mimicking such things as the Great
Commission of Matthew 28:19, which says “go therefore and make disciples of all
nations.”</li>
<li>Atheistic
“science” in the Soviet Union became an <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">ideology</b>
that <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">avoided the scientific method
altogether.</b> This seems to mimic what Saint Paul said in 2 Corinthians 5:7,
namely, that “we walk by faith, not by sight.”</li>
</ol>
The inescapable conclusion is that the Soviet Union did create
a mimicking pseudo-Christianity to function as a “replacement” religion for
their enslaved subjects.
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u>The Implications
of All of This for Achieving a Peaceful Atheism </u></b>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Does the discussion above imply that atheism must
ineluctably lead to violence, persecution, and a tyrannical dictatorship? It
seems to me that the answer is simply that <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">we
can have a peaceful</b> atheism despite what happened in the USSR, Nazi Germany
or any of the other examples cited by Christian apologists. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The solution to this problem is irrefragably multifaceted; consequently,
I do not claim to be providing exhaustive solution to the problem.
Nevertheless, I do think that I can offer a respectable set of recommendations
that will put atheists on the path toward achieving the goal of a peaceful
atheism in real world practice.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
It follows from Van Den Bercken’s discussion that <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">two major types of atheism exist.</b> If a
person were to hold one type then he or she <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">cannot hold the other type simultaneously.</b> To attempt to hold <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">both</b> types of atheism simultaneously
would inevitably lead to a situation in which this person would be holding two <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">contradictory</b> views of atheism. These
two types of atheism are <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">philosophical
atheism</b> and <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">ideological atheism.</b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I have already covered <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">ideological
atheism</b> at some length; this is because the Soviet Union is the textbook
example of an ideological atheism. The other kind of atheism, <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">philosophical atheism,</b> as I will
demonstrate momentarily, has a much better chance of bringing about a workable
and peaceful atheism in practice. Let me summarize the two different types as
presented in Van Den Bercken’s paper:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Ideological Atheism:</i></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="margin-left: 39.0pt; mso-add-space: auto; mso-list: l1 level1 lfo2; text-indent: -.25in;">
<span style="mso-list: Ignore;">1.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";">
</span></span><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Politically</i>
motivated</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 39.0pt; mso-add-space: auto; mso-list: l1 level1 lfo2; text-indent: -.25in;">
<span style="mso-list: Ignore;">2.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";">
</span></span>Has a <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">collective</i>
confession </div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="margin-left: 39.0pt; mso-add-space: auto; mso-list: l1 level1 lfo2; text-indent: -.25in;">
<span style="mso-list: Ignore;">3.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";">
</span></span>Categorical and intolerant of the beliefs held by
others, i.e., only the <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">“official”</i> way
of thinking is tolerated </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Philosophical Atheism:</i></b> </div>
<br />
<ol>
<li>Not politically motivated; instead, <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">scientifically</i> motivated</li>
<li>Does not have a collective confession; instead, is only
an <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">individual</i> concern</li>
<li>Not categorical or intolerant; instead, <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">tolerant</i> of the beliefs of others, i.e.,
favors intellectual pluralism </li>
</ol>
<br />
The first recommendation, which flows naturally from the
summary charts above, is to avoid the deleterious aspects of ideological
atheism and to adopt the salutary elements of philosophical atheism. But notice
what the defining characteristics imply. To me, the defining characteristics of
philosophical atheism, which consist of science, the focus on the individual,
and tolerance of contrary views while avoiding the political, the collective,
and the intolerant, imply that <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">atheism
is feasible when combined with the mindset of individualistic anarchism. </b>Consequently,
my second recommendation is for atheists to embrace a non-collectivist and
individualistic anarchism as the appropriate means for their desired end.
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Perhaps the best way to illustrate the bankruptcy of the
ideological approach to atheism and to illustrate the advantageous nature of
the philosophical approach is to cite a germane passage from Mohammed A.
Bamyeh’s book <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Anarchy as Order: The
History and Future of Civic Humanity</i> in which he states that Friedrich A.
Hayek’s </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
central theme was <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">“spontaneous order”</b> a much more
comprehensive view of how social order arises, in ways that include but are not
limited to economic life. Hayek postulated that social life is made possible <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">not by artificial large institutions</b> <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">that supervise society,</b> but precisely
in their <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">absence,</b> whence <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">order develops spontaneously</b> and
becomes established, over time, as culture or expected patterns of behavior.
These, in turn, <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">work only to the extent
that they are accepted,</b> and they could be accepted, in turn, <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">only if they have developed in conditions
of freedom. </b>(all bold emphasis mine)</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Notice that, according to Hayek, the conditions that make <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">social life</b> <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">impossible</b> are also the conditions that describe <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">ideological atheism. </b>The first major
characteristic of ideological atheism—Soviet atheism—is to politicize
everything. Hayek mentions this when he says that society cannot work when it
is supervised by “artificial large institutions”—he means government
monitoring. In his book <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The Road to
Serfdom, </i>Hayek brilliantly cites Johann Christian Friedrich Hölderlin who
says that “what has always made <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">the
state a hell on earth</b> has been precisely that<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"> man has tried to make it his heaven</b>” (bold emphasis mine). The
state becomes a “hell on earth” because man “tries to make” a heaven by means
of using the total state. Notice that the idea of “trying to make something”
through the state in a top down fashion is the <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">complete opposite of the idea of spontaneous order.</b> To put it
tersely: collective planning does not work. The second major characteristic of
ideological atheism is the collective confession. Hayek, on the contrary, does
not want some “collective confession” to be imposed on people by some ruling
class or quasi-priesthood class as was done in the Soviet Union; he wants the
rules to emerge spontaneously and to be <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">accepted
by people freely.</b> When I think of “collective confession” it reminds me of
when I was forced to go to church as a child. The minister would read a short
passage and the congregation was expected to recite back the correct response
from the hymn book. This was called the “responsive psalm.” It always seemed to
me to be a rather mindless way of acting, i.e., to just spout back
perfunctorily what the official expected me to say. The third major characteristic
of ideological atheism is intolerance. Hayek has implicitly ruled intolerance
out of bounds by insisting that there be <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">conditions
of freedom.</b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Notice further that the conditions that <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">do make social life possible</b> are the conditions that describe <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">philosophical atheism.</b> The first major
characteristic of philosophical atheism is that people are scientifically not
politically motivated. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Hayek
specifically says that he wants to get rid of the big brother approach of the
surveillance society; hence, he is against politicizing everything. He wants to
move decision making from the public or political sphere to the private or
economic sphere. Moreover, if science is viewed as “thinking for oneself” then
his idea of spontaneous order applies here as well. In a spontaneous order,
individuals make choices by themselves <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">using
observable information</b> such as prices combined with their <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">own self-knowledge</b> <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">concerning their own personal tastes, their own personal preferences,
and their own personal values.</b> Notice how radically different this is from
the Soviet Union’s ideological atheism. Under the Soviet model, <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">the individual is deprived of a sense of
self; the individual is deprived of the ability to make choices and is denied
an individual conscience.</b> As Van Den Bercken says of the <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">depersonalized Soviet Union</b>, “man has
to relate his views of life, his ethical, epistemological and aesthetic systems
of values to the interest of the state.” The second major characteristic of
philosophical atheism is that the focus is placed on the individual not the
collective. Again, Hayek’s idea is for <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">order
to emerge from the spontaneous ordering of individuals.</b> The individual <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">continuously adjusts his or her plan to the
plans of others </b>without institutions issuing orders from above. “It enables
entrepreneurs,” Hayek writes in <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The Road
to Serfdom,</i> “by watching the movement of comparatively few prices, as an
engineer watches the hands of a few dials, to adjust their activities to those
of their fellows.” Finally, the third major characteristic of philosophical
atheism is tolerance of the views of others. To me, tolerance is implied by the
word <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">freedom </b>used by Hayek in his
description of what makes for a viable social order. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u>Concluding Remarks</u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Michael Martin in his paper <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Atheism and Religion </i>writes </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
in 1971 the prominent atheist
Madelyn Murray O’Hair argued that atheism was not the religion of the future
since atheists, although numerous, were unorganized and complacent and were
unwilling to fight the legal and political encroachments of Christianity in the
United States. Christianity is gaining more and more political power, she said,
and atheists are doing nothing to stop it.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I think that I have demonstrated that the solution is <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">not</b> <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">to get atheists involved in the political process.</b> Ideological
atheism as practiced in the Soviet Union was a disaster. Or to put it even more
starkly, <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">the State is the</b> <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">cause of war in the first place; therefore,
peace will NEVER be achieved as long as the state exists, regardless of who
runs it, </b>theist, atheist, agnostic, deist, etc. I think that I have shown
that <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">philosophical atheism is compatible
with the values of individualistic anarchism. </b>Since individualistic
anarchism ensures that the State does not exist, it also ensures that <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">war cannot exist.</b> Therefore, to
establish both peace and atheism in the “real world,” one should embrace
individualistic anarchism. This can only happen by rejecting ideological
atheism and by embracing philosophical atheism. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhFRLXsKqOkgIx8tstXN-6sOsHhan2TshVyXQzgVkstP74fa5yEZbo7ra4DpnbTMui3x4_sOvEidDgo3xPKv6-yRVjx_3A8jIPBt189Bv4ir1vvF4-GAxj8CfF2RKiTbMJCkOWOPJB2kMt8/s1600/Daniel+Radcliffe+on+being+a+militant+atheist.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="300" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhFRLXsKqOkgIx8tstXN-6sOsHhan2TshVyXQzgVkstP74fa5yEZbo7ra4DpnbTMui3x4_sOvEidDgo3xPKv6-yRVjx_3A8jIPBt189Bv4ir1vvF4-GAxj8CfF2RKiTbMJCkOWOPJB2kMt8/s400/Daniel+Radcliffe+on+being+a+militant+atheist.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14408794074799022329noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6741330243979105436.post-80139821083648155342013-01-17T19:03:00.001-05:002013-01-17T19:03:10.173-05:00Agorism and Nazism: A Study in Polar Opposites<!--[if !mso]>
<style>
v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style>
<![endif]--><br />
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
<o:AllowPNG/>
</o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:TrackMoves>false</w:TrackMoves>
<w:TrackFormatting/>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:DoNotPromoteQF/>
<w:LidThemeOther>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther>
<w:LidThemeAsian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian>
<w:LidThemeComplexScript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
<w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/>
<w:EnableOpenTypeKerning/>
<w:DontFlipMirrorIndents/>
<w:OverrideTableStyleHps/>
</w:Compatibility>
<m:mathPr>
<m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/>
<m:brkBin m:val="before"/>
<m:brkBinSub m:val="--"/>
<m:smallFrac m:val="off"/>
<m:dispDef/>
<m:lMargin m:val="0"/>
<m:rMargin m:val="0"/>
<m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/>
<m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/>
<m:intLim m:val="subSup"/>
<m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/>
</m:mathPr></w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" DefUnhideWhenUsed="true"
DefSemiHidden="true" DefQFormat="false" DefPriority="99"
LatentStyleCount="267">
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="0" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Normal"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="heading 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 9"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 9"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="35" QFormat="true" Name="caption"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="10" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Title"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" Name="Default Paragraph Font"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="11" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtitle"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="22" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Strong"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="20" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="59" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Table Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Placeholder Text"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="No Spacing"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Revision"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="34" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="List Paragraph"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="29" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Quote"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="30" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Quote"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="19" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="21" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="31" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="32" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="33" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Book Title"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="37" Name="Bibliography"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" QFormat="true" Name="TOC Heading"/>
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u><span style="font-size: 16.0pt;">Agorism and Nazism: A Study in Polar
Opposites</span></u></b><span style="font-size: 16.0pt;"></span></div>
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgssCAhkTTwgvEJzRfEmUnSCAgfXGEdRE-EugjUiSLpnqrTR3rBNnDOiRtQ1GKj3IDUx4wQAOJBpy52eO9ipDXvdO7AuCxLgOETOXIE5uyGZ7HOs2coNw-ScKYrRNimsFqXSyozv_I-Ycbp/s1600/Sheldon+Cooper+and+the+Gorilla+Experiment+for+my+Agora+Paper+for+Daniel.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="226" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgssCAhkTTwgvEJzRfEmUnSCAgfXGEdRE-EugjUiSLpnqrTR3rBNnDOiRtQ1GKj3IDUx4wQAOJBpy52eO9ipDXvdO7AuCxLgOETOXIE5uyGZ7HOs2coNw-ScKYrRNimsFqXSyozv_I-Ycbp/s400/Sheldon+Cooper+and+the+Gorilla+Experiment+for+my+Agora+Paper+for+Daniel.png" width="400" /></a></div>
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS",sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><i>Physika means the science of natural things, and it is there in ancient
Greece that our story begins. It is a warm summer evening circa 600 BC, you’ve
finished your shopping at the local market or agora.</i></span></span>
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In the <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Gorilla
Experiment </i>episode of the <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Big Bang
Theory,</i> Dr. Sheldon Cooper attempts to teach Penny some rudimentary
physics. True to his pedantic nature, Sheldon begins his sketch of the history
of physics by mentioning the <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">agora,</b>
from which we get the modern term <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">agorism.</b>
Following Samuel Edward Konkin III’s (SEK III’s) <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">An Agorist Primer, </i>the word “agora” is still used to this day to mean
simply the “open marketplace.” </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
To the modern agorist, the agora or uncorrupted free marketplace
is the goal; the means of going from the current statism to the agora is called
“counter-economics.” “All non-coercive human action committed in defiance of
the State constitutes the Counter-Economy,” according to SEK III in his book <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">An Agorist Primer. </i>He mentions some specific
examples of what is meant by non-coercive action in defiance of the State:</div>
<br />
<ul>
<li><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;"><span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"></span></span></span>Tax evasion</li>
<li><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;"><span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"></span></span></span>Inflation avoidance </li>
<li><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;"><span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"></span></span></span>Smuggling</li>
<li><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;"><span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"></span></span></span>Free production</li>
<li><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;"><span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"></span></span></span>Illegal distribution</li>
<li>The free flow of both labor (“illegal aliens”)
and capital across borders</li>
<li>
Information and secrecy of that information</li>
<li><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;"><span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"></span></span></span>And many more</li>
</ul>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
The general idea of counter-economics is very similar to
what Robert Neuwirth calls <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">System D</i>
as reported in an interview called <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Why
Black Market Entrepreneurs Matter to the World Economy.</i> Neuwirth says that
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
there’s a French word for someone
who’s self-reliant or ingenious: débrouillard…the street economy…l’économie de
la débrouillardise—the self-reliance economy, or the DIY economy if you will. I
decided to use this term myself—shortening it to System D—because it’s a less
pejorative way of referring to what has traditionally been called the informal
economy or black market or even underground economy. I’m basically using the
term to refer to <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">all the economic
activity that flies under the radar of government. So, unregistered,
unregulated, untaxed, but not outright criminal</b>—I don’t include
gun-running, drugs, human trafficking, or things like that. (bold emphasis
mine)</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I suppose that one could object slightly to Neuwirth’s
definition because he excludes gun-running and drugs, which I think falls under
SEK III’s definition of counter-economic behavior. Since the State is the one
wanting to regulate guns to death and the State is the one trying to enforce
its War on Drugs, then bringing in guns and drugs would be classified, I think,
as non-coercive acts in defiance of the State’s will. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Nevertheless, the reason why I want to mention System D is
because it helps me starkly illustrate that in the final analysis what is being
discussed here is simply <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">human survival.
</b>This is a discussion that, without being hyperbolic, does touch upon <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">life-and-death</b> issues. To make this
unexceptionable point crystal clear, Neuwirth, in his book <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The Stealth of Nations,</i> mentions how System D has helped people
survive the financial crisis:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
A 2009 study by Deutsche Bank, the
huge German commercial lender, suggested that people in the European countries
with the largest portions of their economies that were unlicensed and
unregulated—in other words, citizens of the countries with the most robust
System D—fared better in the economic meltdown of 2008 than folks living in
centrally planned and tightly regulated nations. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
He further illustrates the <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">survival </b>issue with an example from Latin America:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
Studies of countries throughout
Latin America have shown that desperate people turned to System D <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">to survive during the most recent financial
crisis.</b> This <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">spontaneous system</b>,
ruled by the spirit of <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">organized
improvisation,</b> will be crucial for the development of cities in the
twenty-first century. (bold emphasis mine)</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Perhaps one of the most impressive examples of the
counter-economics idea in action is that of what businesspeople did in order to
evade the price control laws of Nazi Germany. It also gives me the opportunity
to bring to light an issue that seems to be neglected; nevertheless, it does
play an important role in undermining the establishment of state sovereignty.
In a truly brilliant passage found in his book <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The Art of Not Being Governed: An Anarchist History of Upland Southeast
Asia</i>, James C. Scott mentions that <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">shifting
of linguistic practices </b>is vital for state evasion and for state
prevention:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
State rulers find it well nigh
impossible to install an effective sovereignty over people who are <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">constantly in motion,</b> who have <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">no permanent pattern of organization,</b>
no permanent address, whose leadership is ephemeral, whose subsistence patterns
are pliable and <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">fugitive,</b> who have
few permanent allegiances, and who are liable, over time, <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u>to shift their linguistic practices</u></b> and their ethnic identity.
And this is just the point! The economic, political, and cultural organization
of such people is, in large part, a strategic adaptation to <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">avoid incorporation in state structures. </b>(all
emphasis is mine)</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
With that prologue now out of the way, let me get to my main
point: that the behavior of some businesspeople (I cannot say all because it is
fairly easy to demonstrate that some businesspeople wanted fascism or even
created it) acted as perfect textbook examples of agorists evading the Nazi
price controls introduced in 1936.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In his book <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The Vampire
Economy: Doing Business under Fascism, </i>Günter Reimann, much like James C.
Scott, emphasizes the importance of permanent change—or subversion of
“standardization”—as a key method for evading the will of the State. Conformity
truly is the jailer of the world. Reimann notes that </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
manufacturers may introduce changes
in standardized products which result in making the finished article more
complicated, <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">solely for the purpose of
enabling the manufacturer to claim that the finished product is a “new
article,”</b> <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">which will not be subject
to the old price restrictions.</b> The State is enforcing more standardization
of production in order to save raw materials; manufacturers must do exactly the
reverse in order to defend their private interests. (bold emphasis mine)</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
To further evade the State’s price control system, buyers
and sellers would set up these “combination deals” that amounted to selling
scarce resources for a higher price while “tricking” the State into thinking
that one was following the prescribed price orders. I want to reproduce in full
Reimann’s story about how the buyers and sellers executed this legerdemain because
it illustrates an <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">actual way of
appearing to be “legitimate” while actually being the complete opposite:</b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
A peasant was arrested and put on
trial for having repeatedly sold his old dog together with a pig. When a
private buyer of pigs came to him, <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">a
sale was staged according to the official rules.</b> The buyer would ask the
peasant: “How much is the pig?” The cunning peasant would answer: “I cannot ask
you for more than the official price. But how much will you pay for my dog
which I also want to sell?” Then the peasant and the buyer of the pig would no
longer discuss the price of the pig, but only the price of the dog. They would
come to an understanding about the price of the dog, and when an agreement was
reached, the buyer got the pig too. <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">The
price for the pig was quite correct, strictly according to the rules, but the
buyer had paid a high price for the dog.</b> Afterward, the buyer, wanting to
get rid of the <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">useless dog, released
him, and he ran back to his old master</b> for whom he was indeed a treasure. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In the end, the peasant never actually sells his dog since
the buyer effectively gives the dog back to him by releasing the dog. The buyer
gets the pig, which is the official side of this transaction, but the seller
gets to keep the official price for the pig <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">plus</b> the phantom dog sale price, thus the seller gets a price <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">above</b> the State mandated price for
selling his pig. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Naturally, the State is going to try to crackdown on such
prestidigitation, a fancy word for any sneaky sleight of hand behavior. Being
Nazi Germany, the State’s response was quite predictable. According to Reimann,
the State <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">used “control purchases”</b>
in order to catch people for audaciously circumventing its price rules. What
exactly were Nazi “control purchases”? They consisted of the following:</div>
<br />
<ul>
<li><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;"><span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"></span></span></span><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Secret
police</b> agents</li>
<li><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;"><span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"></span></span></span>The secret police agents would be <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">plainclothes officers and would pose as
harmless buyers,</b> but willing to offer a higher price than the official
price</li>
<li><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;"><span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"></span></span></span>The secret police agents would then try to <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">induce</b> businesspeople to make an
illegal transaction with them</li>
</ul>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
To me this sounds like a drug sting operation but for such
prosaic items as selling pigs! A pig sting! (That has double entendre written
all over it.)
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In order to avoid getting caught, the idea of <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">shifting one’s linguistic practices </b>comes
into play among those engaged in productive activity. Reimann points out
explicitly that when applying agorism, <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">one
must learn to speak a new language:</b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
In order to discuss illegal
business transactions in a manner that makes them seem legal, <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">businessmen in fascist countries learn to
speak the language of experienced underground adversaries of the regime.</b> They
are often uncertain as to whether a prospective buyer is “reliable” and
therefore talk in terms which are innocent and the meaning of which can be
interpreted in different ways. (bold emphasis mine)</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In conclusion, I think that one possible way to “market”
agorism to people who are currently not agorists is to show that the underlying
ideas have a long and honorable history. I have tried to illustrate this by
using both a recent and a historical example. In the recent example, i.e., the
current financial crisis, agorism and System D have helped desperate people on
multiple continents earn a living and stay alive. Agorism and System D thus are
helping people survive. The compare and contrast is blatantly obvious: the
greedy ruling class caused the problem through their central bank monetary
policies but the agorists provided the solution and it is working in practice. The
Nazi example demonstrates that agorism is a tool for undermining a totalitarian
regime. Once again, agorism can position itself as being on the side of
humanity against some of its most monstrous enemies. And how did our pig buyer
and pig seller do it: through a negotiated exchange in which both parties came
to an acceptable agreement. In other words, voluntary exchange subverts
totalitarianism once again. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhB57xp8b6AihJOsd0a6wHe2TiAQxW69aYyuxtwa6jjxZxkEKWjqfYOuI9JXL62_3niaAt_NtQQVIzvYLc7s1FFIjlZNXnxBDTIP0IaiuF9UWx-SxtDPaALqMKJIISAZ_lNsy15m3H1Otdd/s1600/A+cubed+or+a+to+the+3+a3.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhB57xp8b6AihJOsd0a6wHe2TiAQxW69aYyuxtwa6jjxZxkEKWjqfYOuI9JXL62_3niaAt_NtQQVIzvYLc7s1FFIjlZNXnxBDTIP0IaiuF9UWx-SxtDPaALqMKJIISAZ_lNsy15m3H1Otdd/s200/A+cubed+or+a+to+the+3+a3.jpeg" width="194" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14408794074799022329noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6741330243979105436.post-84279314310449571462012-11-21T00:39:00.000-05:002012-11-21T01:00:00.970-05:00The Illuminati, Rothbardian Natural Law, and Misesian Philosophies of History: Potential Areas for Future Research Today, November 20, 2012, I received four new books in the mail. One of them is called <i>Perfectibilists: The 18th Century Bavarian Order of the Illuminati<b> </b></i>by Terry Melanson. As I normally do, I was flipping through my new books in order to get a "flavor" of what they are all about. In Melanson's book, I came across this fascinating quote that reminded me of two things right away:<br />
<ol>
<li>Ludwig von Mises's book <i>Theory and History: An Interpretation of Social and Economic Evolution,</i> particularly his Chapter 8 called "Philosophy of History"</li>
<li>Murray N. Rothbard's book <i>The Ethics of Liberty.</i></li>
</ol>
<i> </i>At this point, I am not going to draw any definitive conclusions for the simple reason that I do not know what all of this implies. However, I just want to write this down so that I can keep track of the ideas that popped into my head about 10 minutes.<br />
<br />
Let me begin with the quotation from Melanson (he is quoting from Sabine Roehr, <i>A Primer on German Enlightenment: With a translation of Karl Leonhard Reinhold's The Fundamental Concepts of Ethics</i>):<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Weishaupt, the founder of the order [of the Illuminati], developed a <b>philosophy of history</b> that postulated <b>three steps:</b> the original state of nature, despotism, and the <b>kingdom </b>of reason and virtue. He thought that secret societies were the necessary means to that ultimate end of nature, <b>the state in which reason alone would prescribe the laws to humankind.</b> (196, bold emphasis is mine)</blockquote>
<u><b>The Pattern of 3-Stage Philosophies of History</b></u><br />
<u><b><br /></b></u>
Maybe, at the risk of sounding cliche, the most obvious illustration of a 3-Stage Philosophy of History is Marx's famous idea that societies pass through the stages of feudalism, capitalism, and inevitably socialism. Mises mentions that this "setup" is typical of <b>most</b> philosophies of history. Mises writes that<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
most philosophies of history not only indicate the final end of historical evolution but also disclose the way mankind is bound to wander in order to reach the goal. They enumerate and describe successive states or stages, intermediary stations on the way from the early beginnings to the final end. The systems of Hegel, Comte, and Marx belong to this class. (Theory and History, 108-9)</blockquote>
I also want to emphasize the popularity of having <b>three stages</b> in these philosophies of history. Obviously the Marxist example consists of three stages: (1) feudalism, (2) capitalism, and (3) the coming future socialism. Notice that some of the examples given by Mises in <i>Theory and History</i> <b>also follow this three stage pattern.</b> For example, Mises mentions how <b>Christian theology </b>is based on a three-stage process. Then, Mises points out that the <b>Enlightenment thinkers modified the Christian approach</b> in order to make it fit into their more scientific outlook on the world:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Christian theology discerns <b>three stages in human history:</b> the bliss of the age preceding the fall of man, the age of secular depravity, and finally the coming of the Kingdom of Heaven....The Enlightenment altered this scheme in order to make it agree with its scientific outlook. God endowed man with <b>reason that leads him on the road toward perfection.</b> In the dark past superstition and sinister machinations of tyrants and priests restrained the exercise of this most precious gift bestowed upon man. <b>But at last reason has burst its chains and a new age has been inaugurated.</b> (Theory and History, 114)</blockquote>
Maybe there is a parallel between the three-stages of Christian theology and the three stages suggested by the founder of the Illuminati.<br />
<br />
<ol>
<li><b>Christianity = the bliss of the age preceding the fall of man; Illuminati = the original state of nature.</b> In the Illuminati book, we see that <b><u>the</u><i><u> "original state of nature" is painted in rosy terms.</u></i></b> Melanson writes about the Illuminati: "It is worth noting that Weishaupt's concept of virtue stems from his <i>Rousseauian</i> influences. Jean-Jacques Rousseau equated true virtue with the <b>purity of mankind in its infancy BEFORE IT WAS CORRUPTED BY CIVILIZATION</b>" (100, bold emphasis mine, italics in the original). On the same page he adds the point that the next stage, "civilization," was viewed as a "despotism" and "inferior" to the previous state of nature. "By comparison, the <b>despotism</b> of western culture, with its class structures and inherent inequality, <b>was considered inferior and contemptible"</b> (ibid, bold emphasis mine).</li>
<li><b>Christianity = the age of secular depravity; Illuminati = Despotism.</b> This middle stage sounds like the "fall of man" in both case. In both systems, stage one seems to be the "bliss stage" or the "pure mankind" stage. Stage two seems to be the "hell on earth stage" in both systems. </li>
<li><b>Christianity = Salvation and the <u>Kingdom</u> of Heaven; Illuminati = the <u>Kingdom </u>of Reason and Virtue. </b>I found that language very suggestive. Notice how it is called the "Kingdom of Reason and Virtue," as though reason and virtue are standing in for "heaven." It seems like Stage 3 in both systems is a return to some blissful utopia. Or maybe we are supposed to think of the final stage (stage 3) as the "perfection" state of man. In the Christian system this final state is when man is now free from sin. He is no longer "corrupted" by his sinful body but is now "perfect" because he is sinless and living in a state of eternal life in heaven. Similarly, in the Illuminati version, man is now "perfect" because he is no longer "corrupted" by superstitions and tyrants from stage 2 but is now living in the "perfect" state of reason and virtue (stage 3). </li>
</ol>
<u><b>Rothbard's Views on Natural Law</b></u><br />
<br />
Notice also that Stage 3 in the Illuminati scheme, mankind is now in the Kingdom of Reason and Virtue. This was defined as "the state in which <b>reason alone would prescribe the laws to humankind."</b> This reminds me of Rothbard's insistence in <i>The Ethics of Liberty</i> that mankind can find his laws solely by using reason. It shocked me how similar the line from the Illuminati sounds to Rothbard's version of "natural law."<br />
<br />
For example, Rothbard writes that<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
[Grotius's] definition of natural law has nothing revolutionary. When he maintains that <b>natural law</b> is that <b>body of rules</b> which Man is able to <b>discover by the use of his reason,</b> he does nothing but restate the Scholastic notion of a <b>rational foundation of ethics.</b> (The Ethics of Liberty, 5, bold emphasis mine)</blockquote>
As another example of this "supremacy of reason," Rothbard notes that<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
even though God did not exist, or did not make use of His reason, or did not judge rightly of things, if there is in man such a <b>dictate of right reason to guide him,</b> it would have had the same <b>nature of law</b> as it now has. (The Ethics of Liberty, 4, bold emphasis mine)</blockquote>
In conclusion, I am writing this blog more as a note to myself so that I can look into these ideas further in the future. I am in no way trying to claim (at this early point in my research I don't know where this is going) that either Mises or Rothbard have anything to do with the Illuminati. I am simply looking for points of congruence between them and the Illuminati at the level of <b>ideas.</b> Did either Mises or Rothbard borrow ideas that were held by the Illuminati back in the time of Adam Weishaupt? This is not a totally crazy question to ask. When I was looking through Melanson's book I also noticed very quickly that he mentioned Kant and the idea of the <b>a priori.</b> Obviously, this sounds like something Mises would talk about a lot! ("According to the empiricists, Kant was excessively rationalistic in assuming the existence of the a priori and in postulating a noumenal realm apart from experience" 194. There is also a mention of "Kant's categories" on page 195. I am thinking of maybe a link to Mises's book <i>The Ultimate Foundation of Economic Science</i>). So right now I am just thinking about maybe some points of overlap in ideas. I am also looking for points of inconsistencies between Weishaupt on the one hand and Mises and Rothbard on the other hand. At this point I am unclear as to what the "political agenda" of the Illuminati was. Melanson describes it as follows: "Weishaupt preached to his disciples the restructuring of society along lines similar to socialism and communism [I am guessing state socialism? social engineering? because he mentions the infamous "one world government plot"], tinged with elements of nihilism and anarchism [which contradicts the idea of one world government]." <br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjVColy8PEC6BXc-dtpNHwMt-q8_vo4blgbVWoJkm-hYY5COEK6J8ejOtawkgumo4VODGAV7WmNCKJwY_dS6_a6-GQnpJI3u7tDq8-mueLEnmi8N1BzIQEB1wHctyfVGtxa464E33wrK4LA/s1600/Question+Everything+with+Circle+A+Anarchy.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="118" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjVColy8PEC6BXc-dtpNHwMt-q8_vo4blgbVWoJkm-hYY5COEK6J8ejOtawkgumo4VODGAV7WmNCKJwY_dS6_a6-GQnpJI3u7tDq8-mueLEnmi8N1BzIQEB1wHctyfVGtxa464E33wrK4LA/s320/Question+Everything+with+Circle+A+Anarchy.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14408794074799022329noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6741330243979105436.post-15608123132267741502012-10-08T13:19:00.000-04:002012-10-08T20:02:33.367-04:00Agorism and "Barbarians by Design": Parallels between Historical Asian Anarchism and Modern Day Revolutionary Market Anarchism<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEia6daEEiuojV-zp-z3WDRWG6GyqgQG37VFHtSXYg3061qnul5VDkx8nh7_GwhiMe5i2UPrqOe-tGJsx8xvP8BVdqtqSpFCX5abq2410tQH4gK3zoCXMYZ5bVk8ndBI6w-4i2SRn5aWm6e4/s1600/The+ARt+of+Not+Being+Governed+October+3+2012.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="212" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEia6daEEiuojV-zp-z3WDRWG6GyqgQG37VFHtSXYg3061qnul5VDkx8nh7_GwhiMe5i2UPrqOe-tGJsx8xvP8BVdqtqSpFCX5abq2410tQH4gK3zoCXMYZ5bVk8ndBI6w-4i2SRn5aWm6e4/s320/The+ARt+of+Not+Being+Governed+October+3+2012.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
I am currently looking through the masterful work <i>The Art of Not Being Governed: An Anarchist History of Upland Southeast Asia </i>by Yale University professor James C. Scott. I am still in the process of studying this book; consequently, I cannot come to any definitive conclusions about exactly how consistent historical Asian anarchism is with modern day ideas known as agorism (or revolutionary market anarchism). For a brief overview of what agorism is all about, see agorism.info. My purpose in this blog is to simply highlight some of the elements of Asian anarchist history that sound, at least to me, very similar to modern day agorism. In other words, I just want to document some of the key words and key concepts from Asian anarchist history that seem to be very consistent with what a modern day agorist would do in real life. In this blog I do <i>not</i> intend to go into some points that seem to be <i>inconsistent</i> with agorism such as some issues about egalitarianism and land ownership. My purpose here is just to look for some <i>consistencies</i> between agorism and Asian anarchism. <br />
<br />
My speculation over the possible existence of a link between historical Asian anarchism and modern day agorism began with one of Scott's earliest discussions about how these Asian anarchists behaved. Scott writes a lot about this "false dichotomy"--a product of "officially-sanctioned history--that distinguishes between the "civilized" state and the "ungoverned" barbarians. Scott emphasizes that these "barbarians by design" deliberately seek to function outside of the state while still engaging in mutually beneficial trade:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
This account of the periphery is sharply at odds with the official story most civilizations tell about themselves. According to that tale, a backward, naïve, and perhaps barbaric people are gradually incorporated into an advanced, superior, and more prosperous society and culture. If, instead, many of these ungoverned barbarians had, at one time or another, elected, as a political choice, to take their distance from the state, a new element of political agency enters the picture. Many, perhaps most, inhabitants of the ungoverned margins are not remnants of an earlier social formation, left behind, or, as some lowland folk accounts in Southeast Asia have it, "our living ancestors." The situation of populations that have deliberately placed themselves at the state's periphery has occasionally been termed, infelicitously [i.e., inappropriately], secondary primitivism. Their subsistence routines, their social organization, their physical dispersal, and many elements of their culture, far from being the archaic traits of a people left behind, are <b>purposefully crafted both to thwart incorporation into nearby states and to minimize the likelihood that statelike concentrations of power will arise among them.</b> <b>State evasion and state prevention permeate their practices</b> and, often, their ideology as well. They are, in other words, "state effect." They are <b>"barbarians by design." </b>They continue to conduct a <b>brisk and mutually advantageous trade</b> with low-land centers while <b>steering clear of being politically captured. </b>(Scott 2009, 8; emphasis added) </blockquote>
Notice how Scott mentions that "state evasion" and "state prevention" permeate their <b>practices.</b> This seems to be consistent with the definition of agorism in the sense that the focus of attention is the "real world" and pragmatic implementation of the underlying ideas: "the ideology which asserts that the Libertarian philosophical position occurs in the <b>real world in practice</b> as Counter-Economics."<br />
<br />
The last part of the quotation, I think, is the key part: they want (1) to engage in mutually beneficial trades while (2) avoiding "capture" by the political process. The use of this language by Scott makes sense because, as he discusses at other points in his book, the early states really <i>did</i> engage in a lot of "capturing" and "enslaving" of people. Capturing and enslaving people <i>was</i> (and is still) the essence of the state: "The accumulation of population by war and slave-raiding is often seen as the origin of the social hierarchy and centralization typical of the earliest states" (Scott 2009, 67).<br />
<br />
Scott captures this combination of "free trade" and "stateless" people nicely when he writes:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
These stateless peoples were not, by and large, easily drawn into the fiscally legible economy of wage labor and sedentary agriculture. On this definition, "civilization" held little attraction for them when they could have <b>all the advantages of trade without the drudgery, subordination, and immobility of state subjects</b>. (Scott 2009, 10; emphasis added)</blockquote>
This talk of <u><b>all the advantages of trade WITHOUT the drudgery, subordination, and immobility of state subjects,</b></u> is basically what got me really interested in looking for parallels between agorism and Asian history.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Some Points of Agreement between Agorism and Asian Anarchy:</b></span><br />
<h2>
</h2>
<h3>
1. Ignoring Borders</h3>
<h3>
</h3>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEge1G7w_dWvtzcTjq4igys4MyGQl00iMciDxkIgj48_JyjWxfCTSIkE1z4RJLlEDejqSbeXl0suz_m9OunFiHIIzA_5qc7d6oUxlY6rdPAPWzjGRIKapN_ACqFUpbsiNWvVnkf4ynqDbnfS/s1600/No+Borders+No+Nations.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEge1G7w_dWvtzcTjq4igys4MyGQl00iMciDxkIgj48_JyjWxfCTSIkE1z4RJLlEDejqSbeXl0suz_m9OunFiHIIzA_5qc7d6oUxlY6rdPAPWzjGRIKapN_ACqFUpbsiNWvVnkf4ynqDbnfS/s320/No+Borders+No+Nations.jpg" width="236" /></a></div>
One point of consistency between modern day agorism and historical Asian anarchy is that both have nothing but contempt for the artificial border lines of nations. Scott's study of the historical anarchy in Asia definitely discusses the attitude of the people with regard to national borders. Basically, the people <i>ignore</i> the borders:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
For much of the period we wish to examine there was no nation-state and, when it did come into being late in the game, <b>many hill people continued to conduct their cross-border lives as if the state didn't exist.</b> The concept of "Zomia" marks an attempt to explore a new genre of "area" studies, in which the justification for designating the area has nothing to do with national boundaries (for example, Laos) or strategic conceptions (for example, Southeast Asia) but is rather based on certain ecological regularities and structural relationships <b>that do not hesitate to cross national frontiers.</b> (Scott 2009, 26; emphasis added)</blockquote>
In the <a href="http://nj.libertarianleft.org/downloads/against-borders-pamphlet-2010.pdf">Against Borders</a> pamphlet there is a section by Darian Worden entitled "Escalating the War on Freedom." With regard to the question of national borders, Worden writes that<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Borders are gang turf boundaries, usually drawn by conquest and upheld through repressive measures. Those who cross lines drawn across the earth should not have to ask permission from tyrants who created those lines. </blockquote>
In other words, both the agorists and the Asian anarchists refuse to recognize national boundaries as barriers to their free movement and trade.<br />
<br />
<h3>
2. Tax Evasion</h3>
<h3>
</h3>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjjZHSPa-7KzZPvMqclGie6x4O9nu0sg12XbA7AeJS7WcvVkGygxf1nUEpFRS-BLyyt4f9aIZQS7lgfvpUcu8LnTX6kjwOtMB6s68Ettf1fhLO-El9ZpHg8OE5LNFzaOKpZt93Bk8yKAFIR/s1600/Agorist+Class+Theory+By+Wally+Conger+Cover+Page.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjjZHSPa-7KzZPvMqclGie6x4O9nu0sg12XbA7AeJS7WcvVkGygxf1nUEpFRS-BLyyt4f9aIZQS7lgfvpUcu8LnTX6kjwOtMB6s68Ettf1fhLO-El9ZpHg8OE5LNFzaOKpZt93Bk8yKAFIR/s320/Agorist+Class+Theory+By+Wally+Conger+Cover+Page.png" width="244" /></a></div>
Agorism certainly advocates for tax evasion. Some of Samuel Edward Konkin III (SEK3) writings were complied by Wally Conger into a short book entitled <a href="http://agorism.info/docs/AgoristClassTheory.pdf">Agorist Class Theory: A Left Libertarian Approach to Class Conflict Analysis.</a> This book really spells out the agorist position on taxation in the framework of the agorist version of class conflict theory, which is reminiscent of the class conflict theories presented by radical liberals. See for example, Ralph Raico's <a href="http://mises.org/daily/2217#part5">Classical Liberal Roots of the Marxist Doctrine of Classes: The "Industrialist Manifesto" section</a> in which Raico begins by stating the core issue in the class conflict theory as follows: "the history of all hitherto existing society is the history of struggles between the <b>plundering </b>and the <b>producing classes.</b>" <br />
<br />
This is pretty much how Conger begins his introduction to Agorist Class Theory. In summarizing Konkin's five major theses of his theory of classes, the very first thesis is that "the State is the means by which people live by <b>plunder;</b> the Market, in contradistinction, is the sum of human action of the <b>productive.</b>" In the Foreword to this book, Brad Spangler elaborates on this theory of an oppressive class by specifically linking the ruling class to the coercive form of plundering known as taxation:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
The political class is the <b>parasitic class</b> that acquires its livelihood via the "political means"--through <u><b>"confiscation, taxation, and other forms of coercion."</b></u> Their victims are the rest of us--the <b>productive class</b>--those who make their living through peaceful and honest means. (emphasis added)</blockquote>
Implicit in this argument is the assumption that taxes are <b>not voluntary.</b> If taxes were voluntary, then obviously calling the "political class" a "parasitic class" would make absolutely no sense. People would be freely giving the "political class" money in exchange for state-provided goods and services. Of course, no agorist believes that taxes are voluntary. On the contrary, taxes are viewed as a form of involuntary wealth and property transfers. With regard to the question of whether taxes are voluntary or not, one could simply ask, as Murray Rothbard does in his Ethics of Liberty, "what would happen if the government were to abolish taxation, and to confine itself to simple requests for voluntary contributions. Does anyone <i>really</i> believe that anything comparable to the current vast revenues of the State would continue to pour into its coffers?"<br />
<br />
This explains why agorism calls for both tax avoidance and tax evasion. Involuntary taxation implies that one is being robbed; hence, a short agorist pamphlet on taxation is called simply <a href="http://agorism.info/docs/TaxIsTheft.pdf">Tax Is Theft</a>! Agorists openly advocate for tax resistance. As the pamphlet Tax Is Theft says right near the beginning: "remember that there are 40,000,000 successful tax resisters in the U.S. alone, and around 100,000,000 tax avoiders and evaders; yes, nearly everyone." As another excellent example of the agorist position on taxation, see the pamphlet called <a href="http://agorism.info/docs/War_or_Liberty.pdf">War or Liberty: The Real Choice.</a> In this pamphlet, a number of suggestions are given regarding what one should do. The first thing on the list is <b>tax rebellion!</b><br />
<ul>
<li><b>Tax Rebellion (not just "avoidance")</b></li>
<li>Draft Resistance</li>
<li>Smuggling (to circumvent the privileges producers get from trade protectionism)</li>
<li>Wage and Price Control Breaking </li>
<li>Censorship Evasion</li>
<li>Networking with like-minded individuals</li>
<li>Propagating Revisionist History (such as my personal favorite, the works of Gabriel Kolko)</li>
</ul>
<br />
A similar tax avoidance and tax evasion type culture existed in Asia. James C. Scott repeatedly mentions that these people in Asia would move to Zomia in order to avoid the State for a variety of reasons, including taxation. "Subjects who were sorely tried by conscription, forced labor, and <b>taxes</b> would typically move away to the hills or to a neighboring kingdom rather than revolt" (Scott 2009, 33; emphasis added).<br />
<br />
Scott mentions a specific example of a <b>tax revolt, </b>which was led by by a Buddhist rebel in the 18th century:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
As a political location--<b>outside the state but adjacent to it</b>--the ethnicized barbarians represent a <b>permanent example of defiance of central authority.</b> Semiotically necessary to the cultural idea of civilization, the barbarians are also well nigh ineradicable [i.e., the barbarians are almost impossible to eradicate], owing to their defensive advantages in terrain, in dispersal, in segmentary social organization, and in their mobile, fugitive subsistence strategies. <b>They remain an example--and thus an option, a temptation--of a form of social organization outside state-based hierarchy and taxes.</b> One imagines that the eighteenth-century Buddhist rebel against the Qing in Yunnan understood <b>the appeal of "barbarian-ness"</b> when he exhorted people with the chant: <b>"Api's followers need pay NO TAXES. They plow for themselves and eat their own produce." </b>For <b>officials of the nearby state,</b> the <b>barbarians represent a refuge for criminals and rebels,</b> and an exit for <b>tax-shy subjects. </b>(Scott 2009, 125; emphasis added)</blockquote>
In fact, Scott goes on to point out how people would <u><b>deliberately turn themselves in "barbarians."</b></u> Some of the characteristics of these "barbarians-by-design" sound very similar to what a modern day agorist would support fully, including <u><b>tax evasion:</b></u><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<b>"Self-barbarianization" </b>could occur in any number of ways. Han populations <b>wanting to trade, <u>to evade taxes,</u> flee the law, or seek new land</b> were continually moving into barbarian zones. (Scott 2009, 126; emphasis added)</blockquote>
<br />
Jeff Riggenbach, in his <a href="http://mises.org/daily/4881">The Art of Not Being Governed</a>, mentions how the people in the anarchist area of Zomia practiced a method of production that was deliberately designed to make it really difficult for the state to take, i.e., to tax. "The residents of Zomia," writes Riggenbach, "typically practice was Scott calls<b> 'escape agriculture: forms of cultivation designed to thwart state appropriation.'"</b> <b> </b><br />
<br />
In the final analysis, it is important to remember that the power to tax is the core foundation of all States. If you abolish the power to tax, you abolish the State. This point is made explicitly by Michael Rozeff in his paper <a href="http://mises.org/daily/1853">How the Power to Tax Destroys</a>. He goes straight to the most fundamental point: <u><b>no taxes, no ruling class.</b></u> "Where the state is, there is the power to tax; for rulers cannot rule without taxation."<br />
<br />
<h3>
3. The Overblown History of the Importance of States</h3>
Scott also argues that, to quote Riggenbach's <a href="http://mises.org/daily/4881">The Art of Not Being Governed</a>, "the state's importance is usually <b>exaggerated by historians</b>." Such a claim is actually not surprising, especially coming from a revisionist historian such as Riggenbach. Remember, Riggenbach actually wrote a book entitled <a href="http://mises.org/document/4157/Why-American-History-Is-Not-What-They-Say-An-Introduction-to-Revisionism">Why American History is Not What They Say</a>, in which he argues that <br />
<br />
Murray N. Rothbard, in his <a href="http://mises.org/document/1179/The-Ethics-of-Liberty">The Ethics of Liberty</a>, explains why this alliance exists between the Court Intellectuals and the Ruling Classes:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
For if the bulk of the public were <i>really</i> convinced of the illegitimacy of the State, if it were convinced that the State is nothing more nor less than a bandit gang writ large, then the State would soon collapse to take on no more status or breadth of existence than another Mafia gang. <b>Hence the necessity of the State's employment of ideologists;</b> and hence the necessity of the <b>State's age-old alliance with the <u>Court Intellectuals who weave the apologia for State rule.</u></b> (Rothbard 2002, 169; emphasis added) </blockquote>
<br />
<h3>
4. Avoiding and Ignoring Laws</h3>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<h3>
5. Creating a Competing System</h3>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjW4G8gEgrD09cWL4Js0mwkBH-ugK7O6jp2VTlqMbWbhX4oINlTt731cTiaXCpY4yoOW54kjz49iFg5-u7mK-EDQe0ajAa4w-MVb5BJ3bUEzmTTz5zRcj2RscgfSk6o5PVZP557k-BH33kv/s1600/Economic+Policy+Thoughts+for+Today+and+Tomorrow+Cover+Page+Ludwig+von+Mises.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjW4G8gEgrD09cWL4Js0mwkBH-ugK7O6jp2VTlqMbWbhX4oINlTt731cTiaXCpY4yoOW54kjz49iFg5-u7mK-EDQe0ajAa4w-MVb5BJ3bUEzmTTz5zRcj2RscgfSk6o5PVZP557k-BH33kv/s320/Economic+Policy+Thoughts+for+Today+and+Tomorrow+Cover+Page+Ludwig+von+Mises.jpg" width="212" /></a></div>
In a collection of lectures given in Argentina in 1958 at the University of Buenos Aires, Ludwig von Mises told his audience about the <b>very early origins of the free market.</b> These lectures were later printed as <a href="http://mises.org/document/994/Economic-Policy-Thoughts-for-Today-and-Tomorrow">Economic Policy: Thoughts for Today and Tomorrow</a>. The basic story is that the "official system" was rigged in order to favor a small group at the expense of the masses. Unfortunately, the masses were starving to death because of this government-created system of privilege. Consequently, in order to survive--quite literally from death--<b>the masses of people started up an economic system "outside of the official economy," an "underground economy."</b> I will now quote Mises at length because I think it is so important to highlight the fact that <u><b>the free markets were born when the ordinary people defied the authorities and set up their own "underground" economy.</b></u> First, Mises paints a picture of a very bleak environment for the masses of people:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
As the rural population expanded, there developed a surplus of people on the land. For this surplus of population without inherited land or estates, there was not enough to do, <b>nor was it possible for them to work in the processing industries; <u>the kings of the cities denied them access.</u></b> The numbers of these "outcasts" continued to grow, and still no one knew what to do with them. They were, in the full sense of the word, "proletarians," outcasts whom the government could only put into the workhouse or the poorhouse. (Mises 2006, 2; emphasis added)</blockquote>
These "proletarians" were, quite literally, facing death as a result of this situation. At this time, Mises notes, out of a population of roughly 7 million in England, 2 million or 29% of the population were "poor outcasts."Mises also notes that the government officials, in typical form, were totally <b>clueless</b> about what to do. "The statesment did not know what to do, and the ruling gentry were absolutely without any ideas on how to improve conditions" (3). <b>To save themselves from both their incompetent rulers and starvation, the poor turned to <u>innovation for their salvation.</u></b> Mises notes that<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Out of this serious social situation emerged the beginnings of modern capitalism. There were some persons among those <b>outcasts, among those poor people, <u>who tried to organize others to set up small shops</u></b> which could produce something. This as an <u><b>innovation.</b></u> These innovators did not produce expenseive goods suitable only for the upper classes; they produced cheaper products for everyone's needs. (3; emphasis added)</blockquote>
These <b>innovators</b> were definitely upsetting the existing order, which, of course, was designed to benefit the upper classes. The ruling classes reacted, not surprisingly, by <b>running to the government to undermine these innovators.</b> Mises notes that<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
the <b>landed aristocracy</b> again <b>reacted against </b>the new production system. In Germany the Prussian Junkers, having lost many workers to the higher-paying capitalistic industries, invented a special term for the problem: "flight from the country-side"--<i>Landflucht.</i> <b>And in the German Parliament, they discussed what might be done against this <i>evil,</i> </b>as it was seen from the point of view of the landed aristocracy. (8; italics in the original, bold emphasis added)</blockquote>
For me, the key point in Mises's discussion is that in order to break the existing rigged system, <span style="background-color: yellow;"><u><i><b>the masses of poor people have to innovate, i.e., they have to invent a new system of production that isn't rigged for the benefit of a small ruling class.</b></i></u></span><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjt2fIfP1PpAckP7kVf38vUkeYr3vKsjOYPHpFELCyhcASO7fY4XVDj0Pxr0F0ZUjk3qHkxJfycT5UeNBMLrNc6WTCLyE8fumFfzDEqb_JYkN-xTxXJpPSZnXVSwfKw4oIgRUsNxo6FAVYX/s1600/SEK-Poster-Alt-200x300+Agora.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjt2fIfP1PpAckP7kVf38vUkeYr3vKsjOYPHpFELCyhcASO7fY4XVDj0Pxr0F0ZUjk3qHkxJfycT5UeNBMLrNc6WTCLyE8fumFfzDEqb_JYkN-xTxXJpPSZnXVSwfKw4oIgRUsNxo6FAVYX/s320/SEK-Poster-Alt-200x300+Agora.jpg" width="212" /></a></div>
The agorist, the revolutionary market anachist, would label this as an example of <u><b>Counter-Economics.</b></u> A definition of <i><b>"counter-economics"</b> </i>is provided at <a href="http://agorist.info/">agorist.info</a>: <u><b>Counter-Economics is "the study and/or practice of all peaceful human action which is forbidden by the State."</b></u> And this is exactly what Mises was documenting. There was a large collection of people who were <b>forbidden by the kings</b> to engage in production, so these people ignored the existing system of production and set up a new one. We easily see that the "establishment" did not like what was happening because they ran to the parliament looking for a legislative way to shut these innovators down. <br />
<br />
Notice the obvious parallels between Mises's history of the early rise of capitalism and the two-choices for modern day people presented by Konkin in his book <a href="http://www.kopubco.com/pdf/An_Agorist_Primer_by_SEK3.pdf">An Agorist Primer</a>. "You must abandon Economics to the regulators and the political 'businessmen' who play ball with them. You are left with the alternatives: <b>stifle yourself and starve</b> <b>OR</b> embrace <b>Counter-Economics"</b> (38; emphasis added). In Mises's history we have the political "landed aristocracy" working through the government apparatus in order to keep the masses in their "starvation-like" existence. In Konkin's statement we have the political "businessman class" working through the government regulators in order to keep the masses in their "starvation-like" existence as well. <br />
<br />
<br />
<h3>
6. Abolishing Both the Military and Conscription</h3>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<h3>
7. Geography and Statelessness</h3>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgK-8pecbe9nFsU0WDp1BVGCcC01ZpBASN8-b5piXDmdsCu45MxRSLyplH1o5vULnhD9iCFwz2toF75nkorcfEHWAS6muWrmuDr8KkjN1-WdTL9ge3OwtZlKpNTpwSFAwAmgIjaAJQ3jA1b/s1600/The+Movement+of+the+Libertarian+Left+MLL+Black+Flag+Anarchism.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgK-8pecbe9nFsU0WDp1BVGCcC01ZpBASN8-b5piXDmdsCu45MxRSLyplH1o5vULnhD9iCFwz2toF75nkorcfEHWAS6muWrmuDr8KkjN1-WdTL9ge3OwtZlKpNTpwSFAwAmgIjaAJQ3jA1b/s200/The+Movement+of+the+Libertarian+Left+MLL+Black+Flag+Anarchism.png" width="197" /></a></div>
In the <a href="http://agorism.info/docs/NewLibertarianManifesto.pdf">New Libertarian Manifesto</a>, Samuel Edward Konkin III mentions the issue of geography. Specifically, he notes that some areas might still be under state control while other areas might turn toward full-blown agorism. Konkin's suggestions, as I will point out momentarily, sound very similar to what the anarchists in Southeast Asia implemented in Zomia. Konkin writes that "some easily defendable territories, perhaps in space or islands in the ocean (or under the ocean) or big-city 'ghettos' may be almost <b>entirely agorist, where the state is <u>impotent</u> to crush them.</b> But most agorists will live within statist-claimed areas." The Zomian anarchists, of course, also used geography as a way of living where the state is impotent to crush them.Scott documents many examples of how <u><b>geography can be used effectively as a way of evading state control.</b></u> What is very interesting about Scott's study is that he presents examples not only from the Southeast Asian Zomia anarchy but also from other geographic areas including the United States.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14408794074799022329noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6741330243979105436.post-61577680402376832252012-10-04T23:18:00.004-04:002012-10-04T23:18:35.508-04:00Problems with Tom Woods's Claim of Misesian "Immutability" in the Face of Rockefeller Foundation FundingToday (October 4, 2012), thanks to a Facebook comment, I noticed that there is a problem with Tom Woods claim that Mises never changed his views even though he received Rockefeller Foundation funding from roughly the late 1920s to the early 1940s. Moreover, in trying to formulate a cogent response to what Tom Woods wrote, I have lost my faith in the claim that Mises was an anarchist or a quasi-anarchist. The famous "anarchist" quote found in Mises's <i>Liberalism </i>(i.e., the one about self-determination) is <b>not</b> an endorsement of anarchy at all; it is, on the contrary, an endorsement for the creation of a whole bunch of new "pure language" states.<br />
<br />
Let's begin with Woods's statement regarding the alleged Misesian immutability, i.e., the claim that somehow Mises never changed his views in the face of receiving Rockefeller Foundation funding:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
After he [Mises] was off RF money [Rockefeller Foundation money], Mises continued to profess and develop <b>exactly the same views</b> that he had already professed and developed BEFORE he got to meet any RF people. <b>That's not the behavior of an intellectual prostitute.</b> You would rather expect him to change his tune to the likings of his sponsors. (Tom Woods, <a href="http://bastiat.mises.org/2012/08/was-mises-bankrolled-by-the-financial-elite/">Was Mises Bankrolled by the Financial Elite?</a>, bold emphasis mine) </blockquote>
There you go. The claim is that Mises was 100% faithful to his views. He never changed no matter what. I am not so sure. <br />
<br />
As I mentioned above, Mises seems to have been receiving Rockefeller Foundation money in one capacity or another (there are different "incidents" such as the Geneva one or the Business Cycle Research Institute one or the one where he gets Hayek to start some campaign to get funding etc.) from maybe 1926 to maybe 1944 or thereabouts. So to do some sort of an analysis on whether Mises actually <i>was </i>as faithful as Woods claims, I picked two books to scrutinize. <br />
<br />
I picked Mises's <i>Liberalism: The Classical Tradition</i> and his <i>Omnipotent Government: The Rise of the Total State and Total War.</i> In both cases, I am using the Liberty Fund editions (just in case my page numbers don't match up with the electronic versions of these books). There is "method" to my madness so to speak.<br />
<br />
<ol>
<li>Mises wrote <i>Liberalism</i> around 1927, i.e., just at about the time the Rockefeller Foundation started interacting with him. (It sounds as though there was some meeting in 1926)</li>
<li>Mises wrote <i>Omnipotent Government</i> around 1944, near the end of his time with the Rockefeller Foundation.</li>
<li>In other words,<b> I am trying to get a "before" and "after" look</b> at what Mises is professing to believe.</li>
</ol>
On the surface, it appears as though <b>Mises makes a huge change in his views. </b>As I will explain later, I think that this might be an erroneous interpretation. Nevertheless, I want to present it. I fear that there is a false perception that Mises was an anarchist or quasi-anarchist. I think that he was a statist. It is because Mises is being painted as an anarchist or near-anarchist that this very weird interpretation of him can be offered up. So bear with me as I try to present some possible explanations and interpretations.<br />
<br />
Let us begin by assuming that Hans-Hermann Hoppe is correct in his claim that Mises pretty much "crosses over" into anarchism based on Mises's statement in <i>Liberalism.</i> Let me cite Hoppe at length:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
The right of self-determination in regard to the question of membership in a state thus means: whenever the inhabitants of a particular territory, whether it be a single village, a whole district, or a series of adjacent districts, make it known, by a freely conducted plebiscite, that they no longer wish to remain united to a state...their wishes are to be respected and complied with. This is the only feasible and effective way of preventing revolutions and civil and international wars....If it were in any way possible to grant this right of self-determination to every individual, it would have to be done. (Mises, <i>Liberalism,</i> pp. 109-10)</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<b>Essentially, with this statement Mises has already crossed the line separating classical liberalism and Rothbard's private property anarchism; </b>for a government allowing unlimited secession is of course no longer a compulsory monopolist of law and order but a voluntary association. Thus notes Rothbard with regard to Mises' pronouncement, "[o]nce admit <i>any</i> right of secession whatever, and there is no logical stopping-point short of the right of <i>individual</i> secession, which logically entails anarchism, since t<b>hen individuals may secede and patronize their own defense agencies, and the State has crumbled.</b>" (Hans-Hermann Hoppe, Democracy--The God That Failed, footnote 29, page 238, bold emphasis mine)</blockquote>
So let us pretend for the moment that the Hoppe-Rothbard version of Mises's <i>Liberalism</i> is correct. Mises was really an anarchist because of his support for the right of self-determination. <b>This now implies that the Tom Woods "immutable, never-changing Mises" hypothesis MUST BE FALSE.</b><br />
<br />
If Mises is "immutable" then he must be a consistent anarchist. He must be an anarchist BEFORE receiving Rockefeller Foundation money and he must still be an anarchist AFTER receiving Rockefeller Foundation money. Let's now go look at Mises's <i>Omnipotent Government </i>for evidence of anarchism in Mises's writings. What we are going to find is this: <b>Mises sounds like a horrible statist--if he really were an anarchist in 1927 then he certainly is NOT one in 1944.</b><br />
<br />
<b> </b>What alerted me to this fact was actually a comment made by a poster at the Mises Institute. It is a comment at the bottom of the page that allows you to download a free copy of <i>Omnipotent Government. </i>The comment can be found <a href="http://mises.org/document/5829/Omnipotent-Government-The-Rise-of-the-Total-State-and-Total-War">here.</a> I will reproduce it verbatim (i.e., I won't change any of the grammatical or spelling mistakes made by "Roger"):<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
I read the book and the final chapter seems to me to be saying exactly what Bush said. <br />We must abondon the free market to save the free market. Huh? </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
He spends the whole book defending free markets and in the end succoms to socialsit ideals. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
He
calls for a centrally planned economy in europe in the absence of
laissez faire economics, or anywhere else it may be needed. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
He calls for a unitary government. ( which is what the US has devolved into, in my opinion ) </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Where
else would Obama or Holder or any other beaurocrat get the idea that
they have any say whatsoever in legally passed laws in the supposedly
sovereign states. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
A government where all power is seated in one all knowing central planner. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
He
sees a need to force soverign nations to comply with a central
government which answers to no one, and so long as they do they shall
remain free. ( or what? ) </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Mises goes way off the reservation in this one. </blockquote>
<b> </b>Now, when I consulted my copy of <i>Omnipotent Government, </i>I, too, was a bit shocked by the comments made by Mises. For example, Mises writes that<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
if we want to abolish all discrimination against minority groups, if we want to give to all citizens actual and not merely formal freedom and equality, <b>we must vest all powers in the central government alone.</b> (304, bold emphasis mine)</blockquote>
It sounds as though Mises is talking about a "regional government" for all of Eastern Europe--sort of like a 1944 version of the European Union. He seems to think that national states should be reduced to province-like status under a powerful central state:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Let us call this new political structure the "Eastern Democratic Union" (EDU). Within its framework the old political units may continue to function. A dislocation of the historically developed entities is not required. Once the problem of borders has been deprived of its disastrous political implications, most of the existing national bodies can remain intact. Having lost their power to inflict harm upon their neighbors and upon their minorities, they may prove very useful for the progress of civilization and human welfare. Of course, <b>these former independent sovereign states will in the framework of the EDU be nothing more than provinces. </b>Retaining all their honorary forms, their kings or presidents, their flags, anthems, state holidays, and parades, <b>they will have to comply strictly with the laws and administrative provisions of the EDU.</b> <u><b>But so long as they do NOT violate these laws and regulations, they will be free.</b></u> The loyal and law-abiding government of each state will not be hindered but strongly supported by the <b>central government. </b>(305-6, bold emphasis mine)</blockquote>
No anarchist would ever write this. These former states will be reduced to province-like status and they will have to "comply strictly" with all of these rules made by a central government! They will be "free" as long as they obey the orders of their superiors. In other words, they will be slaves under Mises's system. <br />
<br />
<b>Mises does not even sound like a supporter of laissez-faire any more! </b>On the next pages, pages 3078, Mises is advocating for <b>state-subsidized education! </b>Again, no anarchist would ever suggest state involvement in the school system:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
The governments of Eastern Europe abused the system of compulsory education in order to force minorities to give up their own languages and to adopt the language of the majority. The EDU would have to be strictly neutral in this respect. There would be private schools only. Any citizen or group of citizens would have the right to run an educational institution. <b>If these schools <u>complied with standards fixed by the central government, </u>they would be <u>subsidized</u> by a lump sum for every pupil. </b>The local governments would have<b><u> the right to take over </u>the administration of some schools, </b>but even in these cases the school budgets would be kept independent of the general budget of the local government; no <u><b>public funds </b></u>but those <u><b>allocated by the central government </b></u>as subsidies for these schools should be used. (307-8, bold emphasis mine)</blockquote>
As one last example, Mises writes "Democracy can be maintained in the East only by an impartial government" (308). I find it shocking that Hoppe, the ultra-adversary of democracy, would claim that Mises can effectively be an anarchist when he openly calls for democracy. An anarchist wold never support democracy, nor would he or she support this claim that an "impartial government" exists. An anarchist would say that the government is biased in favor of benefiting the ruling class at the expense of the ruled over class.<br />
<br />
Consequently, there is <b>no way that Mises is an anarchist in 1944. This refutes Woods's claim of an "immutable Mises."</b><br />
<br />
Or does it? Maybe Woods's claim of an "immutable Mises" <i>is</i>, in fact, correct! Maybe the problem is the claim that Mises was some sort of 1927 anarchist or near-anarchist based on his comment about the right of self-determination.<br />
<br />
My gut feeling is that Tom Woods's "immutable Mises" hypothesis is probably correct <b>but not in a way consistent with Hoppe or Rothbard.</b> I get the impression that the "official version" is this: Mises was <i>intellectually compatible</i> with Rothbard when it comes to the question of anarchy. This way, there is a rather small gap or even no gap between Mises and Rothbard when it comes to their political views. Or put it this way: Mises is <i>compatible</i> with Rothbard's anarcho-capitalism. <br />
<br />
<u><b>I think that this is all nonsense. I think that Mises was NOT an anarchist and Rothbard and Hoppe are trying to "invent" a non-existent "anarchist" Mises. Consequently, I think that Tom Woods's is correct in saying that Mises is "immutable." Mises doesn't change. MISES DOESN'T CHANGE--HE STAYS CONSISTENTLY STATIST, regardless of Rockefeller Foundation funding intervention.</b></u><br />
<u><b><br /></b></u>
To demonstrate why I think that the <i><u><b>correct interpretation</b></u> is to assert a <u><b>"consistently Statist" </b></u>Mises, </i>I think that all I have to do is this: to show that Mises was statist BEFORE really being sucked into the Rockefeller Foundation sphere of influence. It is obvious that he was a statist with his proposal for a gigantic central state for all of Eastern Europe found in his book <i>Omnipotent Government.</i> So let us go look at Mises's <i>Liberalism </i>in order <b><u>to see if Mises was a statist back in 1927 as well.</u></b><br />
<br />
The first, and in my opinion most obvious problem for the Hoppe-Rothbard interpretation, is that it violates the author's <i>stated thesis!</i> Mises comes out explicitly in <i>Liberalism</i> and say in no uncertain terms that <u><b>HE IS NOT AN ANARCHIST!</b></u> So it is a bit shocking that Hoppe and Rothbard can use a book that explicitly <i>denies </i>anarchism in order to <i>prove </i>that Mises really was an anarchist. This is what Mises says in his own book in 1927:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<b>Liberalism is NOT anarchism, nor has it anything whatsoever to do with anarchism.</b> The liberal understands quite clearly that without resort to compulsion, the existence of society would be endangered and that behind the rules of conduct whose observance is necessary to assure peaceful human cooperation must stand the threat of force if the whole edifice of society is not to be continually at the mercy of any one of its members. One must be in a position to compel the person who will not respect the lives, health, personal freedom, or private property of others to acquiesce in the rules of life in society. <b>This is the function that the liberal doctrine assigns to the state: the protection of property, liberty, and peace. </b>(17, bold emphasis mine)</blockquote>
<b> </b>On the same page, Mises denigrates anarchism as basically a utopian dream. Mises writes, "anarchism misunderstands the real nature of man. It would be practicable only in a world of angels and saints" (17). Yet, Hoppe and Rothbard, <i>using THIS same book, </i>claim that Mises really was advocating anarchy in 1927 by mentioning later on in this book the "right of self-determination."<br />
<br />
If this is true, then should we not then accuse Mises of being totally incapable of developing a consistent argument? In one part of his book he totally condemns anarchy as impossible for us mere mortals, but later in the same book he thinks anarchy should be implemented under the title of "right of self-determination." That seems really inconsistent to me. I, of course, do <i>not </i>believe that Mises is that bad of an author that he can't maintain a consistent argument in a relatively short book. I think that Rothbard and Hoppe are imposing an alien interpretation on Mises's book by trying to make him appear as a Rothbardian anarchist (anarcho-capitalist) when Mises clearly <i>is no such thing.</i><br />
<i> </i><br />
Maybe Mises is attacking one <i>version</i> of anarchy since there are, in fact, many different variations on anarchism out there. This seems to be the line of defense taken by Jörg Guido Hülsmann in his book <a href="http://mises.org/document/3295/Mises-The-Last-Knight-of-Liberalism">Mises: The Last Knight of Liberalism.</a> Hülsmann argues that Mises was <i>not </i>attacking Rothbardian- style anarchism. He was <i>only</i> attacking Proudhonian-style anarchism. Hülsmann writes that<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Mises used the term "anarchism" to refer to the <b>Proudhonian idea</b> of a society <b>without the defense of private property rights,</b> and "anarchy" to designate the chaos he believed to be inevitable for such a society. He did <b>not have in mind the anarchism of his later student Murray Rothbard,</b> who used these same words to advocate a free market society without a modern state--a system in which even the defense of property rights would be provided privately. (Jörg Guido Hülsmann, Mises: Last Knight of Liberalism, end note 44, chapter 13, bold emphasis mine)</blockquote>
Maybe Hülsmann is thinking of what Mises wrote in <i>Liberalism</i> with regard to anarchy and property: "if private property were abolished, then everyone, without exception, would spontaneously observe the rules demanded by social cooperation" (16). Maybe that is why Hülsmann is framing Mises's definition of anarchy as an anti-property type anarchy.<br />
<br />
I do not understand why Hülsmann then calls this "Proudhonian." He seems to be accusing Proudhon of wanting to have absolutely <i>no </i>defense of private property whatsoever. I am not a mutualist, but I think that this is a rather unfair and inaccurate representation of what Proudhon stood for. In the book <i>Anarchy and the Law: The Political Economy of Choice, </i>edited by Edward P. Stringham, we find a fascinating article (chapter 33) by David Osterfeld entitled <i>Freedom, Society, and the State: An Investigation Into the Possibility of Society without Government (excerpt).</i> Osterfeld's portrayal of Proudhon differs sharply from that of Hülsmann. To me, Hülsmann seems to be painting Proudhon as some sort of anti-property communist, but this is certainly <i>not</i> how Osterfeld portrays him. Osterfeld writes this about Proudhon: "Proudhon, in fact, proclaims that property 'is the only power that can act as a counter weight to the State...' Thus, property he says, 'is the basis of my system of federation'" (511-12). <br />
<br />
I don't know what could possibly be clearer with regard to Mises's political philosophy than this:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<b>Liberalism is therefore far from disputing the necessity of a machinery of state, a system of law, and a government.</b> It is a grave misunderstanding to associate it in any way with the idea of anarchism. For the liberal, <b>the STATE IS AN ABSOLUTE NECESSITY. </b>(Liberalism, 19, bold emphasis mine)</blockquote>
Now let us return to the alleged "proof" that Mises was <i>really</i> an anarchist because--in this same book of denouncing anarchy--he came out in favor of anarchy by supporting the "right of self-determination." This "proof" quote that Rothbard and Hoppe pounced upon is found on pages 79-80 of Mises's <i>Liberalism.</i> (The page numbers differ between Hoppe and me because I am using the Liberty Fund edition.) The first thing I want to do is <b>reproduce the FULL QUOTE without Hoppe's deletions.</b> When we stick back in the deleted part, we will quickly see that: <u><b>Mises is NOT talking about setting up an anarchy at all. There is NO talk of private defense forces, nor is there any talk of individual secession. Mises IS talking about ESTABLISHING NEW STATES.</b></u><br />
<br />
In order to see this, I will reproduce the <u><b>ENTIRE QUOTATION</b></u> and I will especially highlight the part that Hoppe deleted in his quotation above. (I faithfully copied out Hoppe verbatim above, at the start of my blog). <br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
The right of self-determination in regard to the question of membership in a state thus means: whenever the inhabitants of a particular territory, whether it be a single village, a whole district, or a series of adjacent districts, make it known, by a freely conducted plebiscite, that they no longer wish to remain united to the state to which they belong at the time, <u><b>but wish either to form an independent state or to attach themselves to some other state,</b></u> their wishes are to respected and complied with. This is the only feasible and effective way of preventing revolutions and civil and international wars. (79)</blockquote>
The part that Hoppe deleted above is the crucial part. Mises didn't say "go declare anarchy" or "go become a Rothbardian anarcho-capitalist!" He said that the people WISH to either form a NEW STATE or JOIN an existing state. This is <b>NOT ANARCHY at all!</b> <br />
<br />
Notice how Mises is clearly stating that this <b>right of self-determination leads to the FORMATION OF STATES.</b> This is totally inconsistent with the anarchistic spin provided by Rothbard and Hoppe. Mises writes that<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
so far as the right of self-determination was given effect at all, and wherever it would have been permitted to take effect, in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, <b>it led or would have led to the FORMATION OF STATES composed of a single nationality </b>(i.e., people speaking the same language) and to the dissolution of states composed of several nationalities, but only as a consequence of the free choice of those entitled to participate in the plebiscite. <b>THE FORMATION OF STATES</b> COMPRISING ALL THE MEMBERS OF A NATIONAL GROUP WAS THE <i>RESULT</i> OF THE <b>EXERCISE OF THE RIGHT OF SELF-DETERMINATION</b>, not its purpose. (Liberalism, 80, bold emphasis mine)</blockquote>
Notice that Mises is not talking about the <i>resulting anarchy</i> of this process. It sounds like he is expecting just the opposite: he seems to be fairly confident that new states would form, based on a "purity" of language. <br />
<b> </b><br />
Mises does <b>NOT </b>use the term "right of self-determination" to imply "individual sovereignty" or "individual secession." This seems to be something that Rothbard is "reading into" Mises, and I think that it is totally unjustified. In fact, Mises seems to be saying <b>the complete opposite</b> of what Rothbard is saying. Mises speaks of <b>restricting this right--in a way that sounds suspiciously similar to democracy and "majority rule."</b> Mises writes "that the right of self-determination <b>be restricted</b> to the <b>will of the majority</b> of the inhabitants of areas large enough to count as territorial units in the administration of the country" (Liberalism, 80, bold emphasis mine).<br />
<br />
In conclusion, I think that I have demonstrated the following points:<br />
<ul>
<li>Mises never was an anarchist</li>
<li>Mises was "immutably" a statist--so Tom Woods is right in claiming that Mises remained consistent in his beliefs </li>
<li>The Rockefeller Foundation funding did <b>not</b> change the essential beliefs of Mises. Mises was statist in 1927, and he was still statist in 1944.</li>
<li>Hülsmann, Hoppe, and Rothbard are trying way too hard to make Mises appear to be an anarchist (they are trying too hard to make him look Rothbardian/anarcho-capitalist)</li>
<li>The "right to self-determination" passage in Mises's <i>Liberalism</i> does <b>not</b> prove that Mises supported anarchism; it actually shows Mises's support for "pure language" states</li>
<li>Proudhon's position on property is misrepresented in order to create a false dichotomy of "anti-property" anarchists and "pro-property" anarchists</li>
</ul>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhpJaq61mrFfw1s4rioRvRLmtSjVbLJ_GjnzfoJV5cFcZLoxgQAW-Klepxzb6p_6xOD52ypgouUzeK2vwGdm9h-qNsZdOjDu01lL-SrHXvAJagGKd5Zg3Qdc40CNadkN2G21L5y3T07PL1z/s1600/Question+Everything+with+Circle+A+Anarchy.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="147" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhpJaq61mrFfw1s4rioRvRLmtSjVbLJ_GjnzfoJV5cFcZLoxgQAW-Klepxzb6p_6xOD52ypgouUzeK2vwGdm9h-qNsZdOjDu01lL-SrHXvAJagGKd5Zg3Qdc40CNadkN2G21L5y3T07PL1z/s400/Question+Everything+with+Circle+A+Anarchy.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14408794074799022329noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6741330243979105436.post-63092460576034270462012-10-02T13:52:00.003-04:002012-10-02T13:52:37.964-04:00Mises mentioned in the Reece Committee Investigation of Tax Exempt FoundationsThe research question that I am currently investigating is: "Why did the Rockefeller Foundation fund Ludwig von Mises?" In doing my research, I added to my library René A. Wormser's book <i>Foundations: Their Power and Influence.</i> I learned about the existence of this book from Murray N. Rothbard. Rothbard mentioned Wormser's book and the associated Reece Committee Investigation in his book <i>The Betrayal of the American Right.</i> The Rothbardian quote that really launched this part of my larger investigation is as follows:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
A valuable summary of the Committee's work can be found in a book by its general counsel, René A. Wormser, <i>Foundations: Their Power and Influence</i> (New York: Devin-Adair, 1958). Some of Wormser's section heads are instructive: "Politics in the Social Sciences," "The Exclusion of the Dissent," "Foundation-Fostered Scientism," "The 'Social Engineers' and the 'Fact-Finding Mania,'" "Mass Research-Integration and Conformity" (<i>The Betrayal of the American Right, </i>p. 136, footnote 3)</blockquote>
So I ordered and received a copy of Wormser's book. I was unable to find a copy from the major booksellers in Canada; consequently, I had to order a copy from a bookseller in Chicago. When I was looking through the book early this morning (maybe 2 AM!), I came across a quotation that mentions Ludwig von Mises. This, of course, is the purpose of the current blog entry.<br />
<br />
Wormser mentions (p. 143) a Mr. Aaron Sargent, "one of the witnesses before the Reece Committee." According to Wormser, Sargent's qualifications are as follows. "Mr. Sargent is a lawyer who has had considerable experience in special investigations and research in education and subversion" (143). The important quotation for my research is found on page 145 (bold emphasis is mine):<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
The growing radicalism which was beginning rapidly to permeate academic circles was no grass-roots movement. <b>Mr. Sargent cited a statement by Professor Ludwig Von Mises </b>that <b>socialism does not spring from the masses but is</b> <b>instigated by intellectuals </b>"that form themselves into a clique and bore from within and operate that way. It is not a people's movement at all. It is a capitalization on the people's emotions and sympathies toward a point these people wish to reach." (145)</blockquote>
I want to conclude that Mr. Sargent's witness testimony to the Reece Committee certainly appears to be <b>consistent with what I know already about Ludwig von Mises.</b> When I read this Sargent citation originally, what popped into my mind was Mises's conclusion to his book <a href="http://mises.org/document/2714"><i>Planned Chaos.</i> </a>Mises's <i>Planned Chaos </i>was originally published in 1947 by the Foundation for Economic Education. The Reece Committee was around roughly from 1952 to 1954; hence, both of my sources are from the same period of history, i.e., circa 1950. You will immediately see the parallels that exist between what Sargent said and what Mises said:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<b>It is not true that the masses are vehemently asking for socialism </b>and that there is no means to resist them. <b>The masses favor socialism because they trust the socialist propaganda of the intellectuals. </b>The intellectuals, not the populace, are molding public opinion. It is a lame excuse of the intellectuals that they must yield to the masses. <b>They themselves have generated the socialist ideas and indoctrinated the masses </b>with them....The intellectual leaders of the peoples have produced and propagated the fallacies which are on the point of destroying liberty and Western civilization. The intellectuals alone are responsible for the mass slaughters which are the characteristic mark of our century. (<a href="http://mises.org/document/2714">Planned Chaos</a>, p. 76, bold emphasis mine) </blockquote>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiSsF2s1ckZBTIcvOhkL6SxwoZpsscNUEVXsqFUKGhWTPuE1yXXiyyYuKfFhNlKM0lken_pmnoysgIFIHN1uR11sJRFizTFqE8mPkUWCbwNJkZ2IIIk179kbUkNVkha45R4IcvjMMgvFcRH/s1600/Question+Everything+with+Circle+A+Anarchy.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="147" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiSsF2s1ckZBTIcvOhkL6SxwoZpsscNUEVXsqFUKGhWTPuE1yXXiyyYuKfFhNlKM0lken_pmnoysgIFIHN1uR11sJRFizTFqE8mPkUWCbwNJkZ2IIIk179kbUkNVkha45R4IcvjMMgvFcRH/s400/Question+Everything+with+Circle+A+Anarchy.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
</blockquote>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14408794074799022329noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6741330243979105436.post-8490084938563132902012-10-01T22:31:00.000-04:002012-10-01T22:31:01.723-04:00On Anarchy by William Graham SumnerAccording to Thomas J. DiLorenzo's book <i>Hamilton's Curse: How Jefferson's Archenemy Betrayed the American Revolution--and What It Means for America Today, </i>William Graham Sumner was "the great Yale University social scientist" (44). I first learned about Sumner from DiLorenzo's book. Sumner had some really strong views on central banking; he saw in central banking a conspiracy between the rich and the government. "This [National Bank] was...only a measure for carrying out the...interweaving of the interests of wealthy men with those of the government" (58). He also had strongly opposed protectionism especially when it was advocated by Alexander Hamilton. "The system of protection[ism] to be found in this report of Hamilton's," wrote Sumner, "is the old system of mercantilism of the English school, turned around and adjusted to the situation of the United States." <br /><br />Both protectionism and central banking are forms of privilege granted by the State to benefit a small group at the expense of a much larger group. We see winners and losers, i.e., those benefiting from the existence of the State and those losing from its existence. The "winners" are called the <b>ruling class; </b>the "losers" are called the <b>ruled over class.</b> From this it is not surprising that William Graham Sumner would eventually <b>advocated for anarchism</b> because anarchy means abolishing the ruling class.<b> </b>Apparently, he "came out of the closet" and declared to his classroom of students at Yale University that he was an anarchist! What I find to be very interesting is that Sumner associates <b>anarchy with laissez-faire economics.</b> Sumner appeared to be an anarcho-capitalist before the term was even coined! <br /><br />I admire Sumner's courage for standing up in his class and speaking these memorable words:<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Gentlemen, the time is coming when there will be two great classes, Socialists, and Anarchists. The Anarchists want the government to be nothing, and the Socialists want the government to be everything. There can be no greater contrast. Well, the time will come when there will be only these two great parties, the Anarchists representing the <i>laissez faire</i> doctrine and the Socialists representing the extreme view on the other side, and when that time comes I am an Anarchist. </blockquote>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjKfR7eGBb7AWNKkcTkzq8-s2XI8qTtOyMTx8lkfG8yLHw2L9KH8rQyw3CfUQkWfCYEe8UuuxN2Rl1PQnD4FzDeIR4aV57ZhMXWy8v3c4R3HK_eG1s7-aAv_Y98Fvw5MtdKndeBHcIC0ohm/s1600/Total+Freedom+September+6+2012+Anarchist+Symbol.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="235" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjKfR7eGBb7AWNKkcTkzq8-s2XI8qTtOyMTx8lkfG8yLHw2L9KH8rQyw3CfUQkWfCYEe8UuuxN2Rl1PQnD4FzDeIR4aV57ZhMXWy8v3c4R3HK_eG1s7-aAv_Y98Fvw5MtdKndeBHcIC0ohm/s400/Total+Freedom+September+6+2012+Anarchist+Symbol.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14408794074799022329noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6741330243979105436.post-28742890626860247942012-09-29T19:53:00.001-04:002012-09-29T19:53:07.520-04:00Part 2 Preliminary Research on the 2-Stage Hypothesis of Foundation Funding of LibertariansWhen a funding relationship is discovered to exist between a libertarian researcher and a Foundation--usually perceived of as an "evil" Foundation with malevolent intentions--the standard explanation seems to be what I will call <b>the 2-Stage Hypothesis of Foundation Funding.</b> Let me illustrate what I mean with two cogent examples from libertarian history.<br />
<br />
In the Mises Institute forum post entitled <a href="http://mises.org/community/forums/p/6731/98759.aspx">Lyndon Larouche's Mises-Hayek conspiracy theories,</a> a poster named Aragon notes, in part, that one of the accusations against the Austrian School of Economics is that the Austrian School is a "front" for the Central Intelligence Agency or CIA. "The <b>National Review</b> is considered the most influential <b>CIA publication</b>. It consistently puffs Jean Kirkpatrick, Milton Friedman, and other cognoscenti of the intelligence community and the <b>Viennese School of Economics</b>" (emphasis mine). What this argument is trying to say is simply that Murray N. Rothbard was a "puppet" for the Central Intelligence Agency.<br />
<br />
Did Murray N. Rothbard work for the CIA-publication called the National Review? The answer is unequivocally yes. Was the National Review <i>really</i> a CIA-publication in the first place?<br />
<br />
According to Dr. Hans-Hermann Hoppe, the CIA <i>did</i> fund the National Review. Hoppe writes in his book Democracy: The God That Failed (p. 190, footnote 3, paragraph 2) that<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
a second, somewhat older but nowadays almost indistinguishable branch of contemporary American conservatism is represented by the <i>new</i> (post World War II) conservatism launched and promoted, <b>with the assistance of the CIA, by William Buckley and his <i>National Review.</i></b> Whereas the old (pre-World War II) American conservatism had been characterized by decidedly anti-interventionist (isolationist) foreign policy views, the trademark of Buckley's new conservatism has been its rabid militarism and interventionist foreign policy. (bold emphasis mine; italics in the original)</blockquote>
There is also no question that Murray N. Rothbard <i>did, </i>in fact, work for the National Review and for William or Bill Buckley. We know that Rothbard worked for the National Review because he speaks quite candidly about his role in the organization. Rothbard himself was quite aware of the fact that he was working for the CIA. Rothbard writes in his book <a href="http://mises.org/document/3316/The-Betrayal-of-the-American-Right">The Betrayal of the American Right</a> that the CIA was pulling pretty much <i>all the strings</i> at the National Review:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
We should now ask whether or not a major objective of <i>National Review </i>from its inception was to transform the right wing from an isolationist to global warmongering anti-Communist movement; and, particularly, whether or not the entire effort was in essence a CIA operation. We now know that Bill Buckley, for the two years prior to establishing <i>National Review, </i>was admittedly a CIA agent in Mexico City, and that the sinister E. Howard Hunt was his control. His sister Priscilla, who became managing editor of <i>National Review,</i> was also in the CIA; and other editors James Burnham and Willmoore Kendall had at least been recipients of CIA largesse in the anti-Communist Congress for Cultural Freedom. In addition, Burnham has been identified by two reliable sources as a consultant for the CIA in the years after World War II. (168)</blockquote>
Rothbard also speaks quite openly about the role <i>he played</i> at the National Review. Rothbard, writing about himself, observes that<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>National Review's </i>image of me was that of a lovable though Utopian libertarian purist who, however, must be kept strictly confined to propounding <i>laissez-faire</i> economics, to which <i>National Review</i> had a kind of residual rhetorical attachment....But above all I was supposed to stay out of political matters and leave to the warmongering ideologues of <i>National Review</i> the gutsy real-world task of defending me from the depredations of world Communism, and allowing me the luxury of spinning Utopias about private fire-fighting services. I was increasingly unwilling to play that kind of a castrate role. (177)</blockquote>
Common sense tells me that something is rotten here in our metaphorical State of Denmark. The issue of <b>"shared confession"</b> plays a predominant role in this type of "conspiracy theory" research. As serious historical researchers, we must look for <b>"a shared world view" </b>and for <b>"shared ideas." </b>In fact, Gary North explains, in his article <a href="http://www.lewrockwell.com/north/north95.html">Writing Conspiracy History: Lists Are Not Enough,</a> <b>the correct procedure for doing historical research in a "conspiracy theory" type setting:</b> <br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
There are many levels of association, dependence, and interaction among political groups and activist organizations. <b>What matters most is shared confessions, not shared money. Shared ideas, not a long list of names </b>on the yellowing letterhead stationery of a short-lived, peripheral, one-man organization like the Religious Roundtable, are what matters. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<b>Serious historical research</b> involves more than collecting membership lists and letterhead lists from old archives or Web-based data bases. <b>The researcher must ask himself: "So what?" </b>He must show that the connections have to do with <b>a shared worldview</b> and shared sources of funding, especially funding by an organization or a family with an identifiable agenda that stretches across two generations or more. (bold emphasis mine)</blockquote>
So, is there a "shared worldview" or "shared ideas" between the National Review and Rothbard? From Rothbard's own discussion above, the National Review saw him as "lovable though Utopian libertarian purist" who was "strictly confined" to "safe topics." <b>But on the core issue--i.e., on foreign policy--ROTHBARD AND THE NATIONAL REVIEW STRONGLY DISAGREE.</b> The National Review became an advocate of "rabid militarism and interventionist foreign policy." The obvious question to ask is: did Rothbard support militarism or an interventionist foreign policy? The simple answer is NO, he did not. Some evidence to support this conclusion can be found in David Gordon's article entitled <a href="http://mises.org/daily/5670/Rothbard-against-War">Rothbard against War.</a> Gordon writes of a Rothbard who not only intellectually disagrees with the National Review but also openly opposes their policies. Gordon writes of Rothbard's strong stand <i>against</i> the National Review and the Cold War:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<br />Although Rothbard was an early contributor to William Buckley's <i>National Review,</i> <b>he rejected the aggressive pursuit of the Cold War </b>advocated by Buckley and such members of his editorial staff as James Burnham and Frank S. Meyer. He broke with these self-styled conservatives and thereafter <b>became one of their strongest opponents. </b>(bold emphasis mine)</blockquote>
<br />
One attempt to explain this "bizarre" relationship between the pro-militarist and statist National Review and the anti-militarist and anarchist Rothbard is to use what I am calling the <b>2-Stage Hypothesis of Foundation Funding</b> mentioned by Daniel McCarthy in his <a href="http://www.lewrockwell.com/dmccarthy/dmccarthy47.html">National Review Isn't Right.</a> McCarthy writes explicitly about this <b>2-Stage Hypothesis </b>when he describes the history of Rothbard's relationship with the National Review. The basic sequence of events for a <b>NEW Foundation</b> is (1)Stage 1: hire big names in order <b>to build credibility</b> for the new foundation, (2)<b>purge</b> the undesirables in order to transition into Stage 2; (3)Stage 2: now launch the <b>"real" politically motivated agenda</b>:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Was there ever a time when <i>National Review</i> was conservative? Certainly conservatives were once published in its pages, especially in the <b>early years</b> when <i>National Review</i> <b>was seeking to establish itself as <i>the</i> voice </b>of the American Right and American conservatives were in desperate need of a journal. But once <i>National Review</i> had <b>counterfeited its credentials </b>it soon began to <b>purge</b> anyone on the Right who disagreed with its line, from the John Birch Society to Murray Rothbard, and later Joseph Sobran.... Having slandered most of its rivals on the Right as kooks or anti-Semites, <i>National Review</i> can <b>now afford to be more open about its imperial agenda. </b>(bold emphasis mine in order to highlight the process: first credibility building, then purging of heretics, and finally real agenda launching, i.e., coming out of the closet in favor of American imperialism)</blockquote>
To summarize, the <b>2-Stage Hypothesis of Foundation Funding </b>is:<br />
<br />
<ol>
<li>Hire famous names in order to build credibility for the new Foundation</li>
<li>After purging the heretics (who were hired in Stage 1), launch the "real" political agenda<b> </b></li>
</ol>
Recently, on August 31, 2012, the <b>2-Stage Hypothesis of Foundation Funding </b>was applied by Tom Woods in his Circle Bastiat article entitled <a href="http://bastiat.mises.org/2012/08/was-mises-bankrolled-by-the-financial-elite/">Was Mises Bankrolled by the Financial Elite? </a>In this article, Woods is addressing another Lyndon LaRoche inspired conspiracy theory leveled against the Austrian School of Economics. In this conspiracy theory, the claim is made that Austrian School Economics is a front for the power elites. The rich, powerful, and famous apparently want to adopt the policies advocated for by Mises. In Woods's explanation of what he thinks happened between Mises and the Rockefeller Foundation, Woods follows the same <b>2-Stage Hypothesis</b> that Daniel McCarthy followed earlier. I will, once again, add emphases in order to make it explicit that Woods is following the <b>2-Stage Hypothesis:</b><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<b> </b>The RF [Rockefeller Foundation] started funding Mises because he was already a major representative of Viennese intellectual life. Mises was part of the European intellectual establishment before he received financial support from US financial aristocracy. Like all <b>new private research institutions,</b> the RF <b>first</b> tried to hop into bed with the already existing scientific establishment to <b>prop up its own reputation [or get the credibility it needs as the new kid on the block].</b> <b>Only</b> in a <b>second step</b> did the RF (and similar organizations) try to <b>steer the scientific agenda</b> according to its own political and philosophical prejudices. <b>When they proceeded from Step One to Step Two, </b>there was <b>no more place for Mises</b> precisely because his views were unacceptable to RF. (bold emphasis mine)</blockquote>
Summarizing Woods's discussion:<br />
<ol>
<li>The Rockefeller Foundation as the new foundation (just as the National Review was the new voice of conservatives back during the Cold War) hires a famous name, Mises, in order to build up the Foundation's credibility and reputation. </li>
<li>Mises gets purged (fired) when the Foundation proceeds from Step One to Step Two. Mises is the heretic who got purged. Then the real "steered scientific agenda" comes out into the open.</li>
</ol>
I am going to stop this blog at this point. For my next blog, Part 3, I plan to carry on where this blog ends. The plan for Part 3 is to attempt to answer the following research question: Does the <b>2-Stage Hypothesis</b> fit the historical facts pertaining to the history of Mises being funded by the Rockefeller Foundation? To be frank, I am not sure at this point. From Part 1, I think that Mises's liberalism might have been of <i>value</i> to the Rockefeller Foundation because liberalism enables foreign imperialism and the Rockefellers might favor more American imperialism. I am also unsure about whether this Stage 1 and Stage 2 type setup actually existed. I kind of think that the Rockefeller Foundation was "steering the political agenda" from day one, that is, the Foundation did not wait for a Stage 2 in order to finally launch its manipulations. But I still have to do a lot more research before coming to any definitive conclusions. <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh_mQdCfoILBfifO-kVu2h5_0DjAUsgxlELO1zQK3TkCLJv0cEFJ5KrMnmTneWNWkS19PqxlghfGoF4-biDM9Sdit4vGfKCTl7THIYRfIn3gHuWGKL9-oIfSnMOs2b4GiN5LkvVPe2SQXSa/s1600/Question+Everything+with+Circle+A+Anarchy.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="148" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh_mQdCfoILBfifO-kVu2h5_0DjAUsgxlELO1zQK3TkCLJv0cEFJ5KrMnmTneWNWkS19PqxlghfGoF4-biDM9Sdit4vGfKCTl7THIYRfIn3gHuWGKL9-oIfSnMOs2b4GiN5LkvVPe2SQXSa/s400/Question+Everything+with+Circle+A+Anarchy.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14408794074799022329noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6741330243979105436.post-52564362153748644182012-09-28T22:45:00.002-04:002012-09-28T22:48:56.605-04:00Part 1 Some Preliminary Research on the Mises-Rockefeller Foundation FundingOn the Ludwig von Mises webpage, one can find a few posts discussing the historical fact that Ludwig von Mises <i>did</i>, in fact, receive funding from the Rockefeller Foundation. My curiosity regarding the funding of Mises was aroused when I stumbled across the post entitled <a href="http://mises.org/community/forums/t/20332.aspx?PageIndex=1">WTF Rockefeller funded Mises?</a> I have been thinking about this for some time because this funding arrangement seems really odd to me. Why on earth would the Rockefeller Foundation show any interest in Mises? In the introduction to Murray N. Rothbard's <a href="http://mises.org/document/1022/History-of-Money-and-Banking-in-the-United-States-The-Colonial-Era-to-World-War-II">A History of Money and Banking in the United States: The Colonial Era to World War II</a>, Joseph T. Salerno raises an important point. He notes that "the question of <i>'Cui bono?'</i>--or 'Who benefits?'--from changes in policies and institutions receives very little attention." This has been precisely the question I have been asking myself for some time: how did the Rockefeller Foundation benefit (if at all) from funding Ludwig von Mises? What were their motives for funding him? Moreover, how does Mises benefit (if at all) from receiving Rockefeller Foundation support? Actually I have a number of unanswered questions such as the following:<br />
<ol>
<li>Could<i> <b>the motive</b></i> for funding Mises be <i><b>to advance an imperialist agenda,</b></i> which would probably be beneficial to the Rockefellers? The reason I put this forward as a possibility is because of three fascinating (at least to me) quotations. One is by Hans-Hermann Hoppe in his article <a href="http://mises.org/daily/2383">The Paradox of Imperialism,</a><i> </i>and another is by Samuel Edward Konkin III who is quoted by Wally Conger in the essay entitled <a href="http://agorism.info/docs/AgoristClassTheory.pdf">Agorist Class Theory: A Left Libertarian Approach to Class Conflict Analysis. </a> The third is by Gary North in his article <a href="http://www.lewrockwell.com/north/north381.html">EUthanasia. </a> </li>
<ol>
<li><b>Hoppe</b> mentions that internal or domestic liberalism in states such as the United States of America--remember Mises was a strong advocate for classical liberalism--is the breeding ground for external <i>imperalism.</i> Conversely, the internal or domestic repression of states such as the former Soviet Union is the breeding ground of just the opposite foreign policy, namely, a peaceful foreign policy. Let me quote Hoppe at length because it seems to suggest that a motive for funding domestic liberalism is to advance foreign imperalism.</li>
<ol>
<li>"Other things being equal, the lower the tax and regulation burden imposed on the domestic economy, the larger the population will tend to grow and the larger the amount of domestically produced wealth on which the state can draw in its conflicts with neighboring competitors. That is, states which tax and regulate their economies comparatively little--liberal states--tend to defeat and expand their territories or their range of hegemonic control at the expense of less-liberal ones. This explains, for instance, why Western Europe came to dominate the rest of the world rather than the other way around. More specifically, it explains why it was first the Dutch, then the British and finally, in the 20th century, the United States, that became the dominant imperial power, and why the United States, internally one of the most liberal states, has conducted the most aggressive foreign policy, while the former Soviet Union, for instance, with its illiberal (repressive) domestic policies has engaged in a comparatively peaceful and cautious foreign policy. </li>
</ol>
<li><b>Konkin </b>also comes out, more directly than Hoppe did, and says that liberalism is a trick of the ruling class. Konkin basically sees liberalism in the same way that Hoppe does, namely, that liberalism is just a more efficient way of feeding the state apparatus. I want to also cite Konkin at length because he seems this internal "skimming" process going on with classical liberalism. Konkin is effectively saying that the classical liberalism advocated for by Mises is purely <i>statism.</i> From Roderick T Long, the State is the <i>cause</i> of the ruling class. Long writes in his article <a href="http://praxeology.net/libertariannation/a/f21l2.html"><i>Can We Escape the Ruling Class?</i> </a>that "economic analysis suggests that the ruling class is primarily a creation of the state and not vice sersa." Hence, the ruling class is inherently statist; the ruling class has a <i><b>motive</b></i> to keep the state in existence. Since Mises's liberalism is statist as well, then <b>Mises <i>poses no threat to the ruling class </i>when he advocates for classical liberalism. </b></li>
<ol>
<li>"Remember, the liberal statists want to restrain the State to increase the production of the host to maximize eventual parasitism. They 'control their appetites' but continue the system of plunder. The recent political example of supply-side economics starkly illustrates the basic statist nature of such ideas: the tax rate is lowered in order to encourage greater economic production and thus a greater total tax collection in the long run."</li>
</ol>
<li><b>North</b> mentions in his article, EUthanasia, that Raymond Fosdick, who wrote the important book <i>The Story of the Rockefeller Foundation</i> and who was definitely a long-time Rockefeller "insider," approached Mises supposedly for the purpose of advancing the cause of "free trade." I suspect that "free trade" is being used euphemistically to mean "mercantilism." This is the same problem with modern "free trade" agreements such as NAFTA. They pretend to be about "free trade" when, in fact, they are really about its opposite. This is what I like to think of as the <b>"bait-and-switch" </b>problem with these alleged "free trade" agreements. Moreover, maybe by "free trade" they are really talking about some sort of "imperialism" in the sense of using the United States government to "open up" foreign markets. This was the argument used to justify imperialism in the 19th century and reported upon by Murray N. Rothbard in his book <a href="http://mises.org/document/6119/The-Origins-of-the-Federal-Reserve">The Origins of the Federal Reserve.</a> Rothbard notes that the imperialists of the late 19th century dressed up imperialism as "free trade" or as "opening up new markets." Rothbard writes that "By the late 1890s, groups of theoreticians in the United States were working on what would later be called the 'Leninist' theory of capitalist imperialism....To save advanced capitalism, it was necessary for Western governments to engage in outright imperialist or neo-imperialist ventures, <b>which would force other countries to open their markets </b>for American products and would <b>force open investment opportunities </b>abroad" (emphasis added). Gary North's important quotation is as follows.</li>
<ol>
<li>"Raymond Fosdick was a long-term strategist. In the 1940s, he financed the best free market economists he could locate to promote the ideal of free trade. Ludwig von Mises and his disciple Wilhelm Roepke each published a book that had been financed by the Rockefeller Foundation. [Given the 1940s date and the Rockefeller funding, my best guess is that Gary North is alluding to Mises's <i>Omnipotent Government: The Rise of the Total State and Total War, </i>published in 1944 originally and admittedly funded by "the Rockefeller Foundation and...the National Bureau of Economic Research."] Yet neither of them believed in setting up a world government. This did not bother Fosdick. He and [Jean] Monnet adopted the same strategy: first free trade [or maybe bait and switch by telling the public you want free trade but then implementing "managed" or "rigged" trade, but that is my guess], then the creation of a regional government that possess judicial sovereignty. This plan has been systematically promoted by the Trilateral Commission, created in 1973 by John D. Rockefeller, Jr.'s son, David. </li>
</ol>
</ol>
</ol>
<br />
<br />
Some evidence from the historical record suggests that it was Mises who approached the Rockefeller Foundation initially for funding, and not the other way around. "In Vienna, one of the first to seize the Rockefeller opportunity was actually von Mises, who, in 1930, although he viewed social planning and control as antithetical to contemporary civilization, approached Van Sickle for support," writes Robert Leonard in his essay entitled <a href="http://www.cirst.uqam.ca/Portals/0/docs/note_rech/2006_03.pdf">From Austroliberalism to Anschluss: Oskar Morgenstern and the Viennese Economists in the 1930's. </a>However, in Jörg Guido Hülsmann's biography of Mises's life entitled <a href="http://mises.org/document/3295/Mises-The-Last-Knight-of-Liberalism">Mises: The Last Knight of Liberalism</a>, Mises seemed to be somewhat delighted or maybe even flattered that the Rockefeller Foundation had begun to hang out with him around 1926. [I think, but I can't remember for sure at the moment, that Mises says somewhere that the Rockefeller Foundation had been "following his work" for some time prior to this.] Writing about Mises's 1926 journey to America, Hülsmann observed that Mises was interacting with the movers and shakers in the Rockefeller world. He wrote that "In New York City, he [Mises] also met the leadership of the Rockefeller Foundation and seems to have made an excellent impression....He later recalled that the Rockefeller Foundation had 'taken a kind interest in my teaching and research work.'"<br />
<br />
Hülsmann's book also provides <i><b>another possible motive</b></i> for the Rockefeller Foundation's funding of Mises. It might be that the Rockefeller Foundation needed to keep Mises around as <i>opposition to</i> one of their other stated objectives of this time period, namely, the objective of turning economics into applied statistics. Maybe they wanted to create the illusion of "intellectual choice" even though they were funding the positivist side of this debate very heavily. Hülsmann writes that<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
[Allyn] Young was known as a diehard positivist, and he was expected to make the economics department [at the London School of Economics] a center for the transformation of economic science into applied mathematics. This had been a longstanding plan of the socialist founders of the school, and of the New York-based Laura Spelman Memorial [i.e., the Laura Spelman <b>Rockefeller</b> Memorial], which donated large sums to LSE for research on the "natural bases" of economics.</blockquote>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiK98p5rnh4r7g8FADf0Lvh6j4blcrPqGa7dt0UALK_MCHWRGncOmFpuCZ1J-ymAVhYK1Cw6HmeMQBdjHd8Ei6NxGmCYvUxZCOcGXrUMXWM8a6VcNXyk2ZZE40eYls37DTpNCu4TAw1N7__/s1600/Question+Everything+with+Circle+A+Anarchy.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="118" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiK98p5rnh4r7g8FADf0Lvh6j4blcrPqGa7dt0UALK_MCHWRGncOmFpuCZ1J-ymAVhYK1Cw6HmeMQBdjHd8Ei6NxGmCYvUxZCOcGXrUMXWM8a6VcNXyk2ZZE40eYls37DTpNCu4TAw1N7__/s320/Question+Everything+with+Circle+A+Anarchy.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14408794074799022329noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6741330243979105436.post-89132137306523425692012-07-15T15:39:00.001-04:002012-07-15T15:42:35.753-04:00Mises on Why Capitalism is to Blame for Everything Bad in this World<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<span style="font-size: large;">This is a hilariously funny quotation from Ludwig von Mises on why capitalism is to blame for everything bad in this world!</span></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: inherit;">
<span style="font-size: large;">Mises writes that</span></div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="font-family: inherit;">
<span style="font-size: large;">nothing is more unpopular today than the free market
economy, i.e., capitalism. Everything
that is considered unsatisfactory in present-day conditions is charged to capitalism. The atheists make
capitalism responsible for the survival of Christianity. But the papal encyclicals blame capitalism
for the spread of irreligion and the sins of our contemporaries, and the
Protestant churches and sects are no less vigorous in their indictment of
capitalist greed. Friends of peace
consider our wars as an offshoot of capitalist imperialism. But the adamant nationalist warmongers of
Germany and Italy indicted capitalism for its "bourgeois" pacifism,
contrary to human nature and to the inescapable laws of history. Sermonizers accuse capitalism of disrupting
the family and fostering licentiousness.
But the "progressives" blame capitalism for the preservation
of allegedly outdated rules of sexual restraint. Almost all men agree that poverty is an outcome of
capitalism. On the other hand many
deplore the fact that capitalism, in catering lavishly to the wishes of people
intent upon getting more amenities and a better living, promotes a crass
materialism. These contradictory
accusations of capitalism cancel one another.
But the fact remains that there are few people left who would not condemn capitalism altogether. </span></blockquote>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjgcc1AQyS3O3UlCQLq8Wa_fDWVrlYLw9Hf0ABxXAXIOYJtj8dPaCc2km0LKUZWkTOLsXHhG0PBWT0txtAdb8yqa4uRtrj4JjLJoCxUO95TOR1rvSdcafRmCtArMjHL3JfH01gleqBccBv1/s1600/Planned+Chaos+Cover+Page.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjgcc1AQyS3O3UlCQLq8Wa_fDWVrlYLw9Hf0ABxXAXIOYJtj8dPaCc2km0LKUZWkTOLsXHhG0PBWT0txtAdb8yqa4uRtrj4JjLJoCxUO95TOR1rvSdcafRmCtArMjHL3JfH01gleqBccBv1/s1600/Planned+Chaos+Cover+Page.jpg" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<br />Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14408794074799022329noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6741330243979105436.post-44073494150232538022012-06-29T23:40:00.000-04:002012-06-29T23:40:03.489-04:00Austrian Macroeconomics on Economic Depressions with a Monetarist Twist!This is a quotation from Richard M. Ebeling's <i>Austrian Macroeconomics: Review of Roger W. Garrison's Time and Money.</i><br />
<br />
What is going on here is this: Ebeling first provides the standard Austrian School explanation of economic depressions. This is the story involving the money supply being artificially increased followed by the artificial lowering of the market interest rate. This then causes resources to shift into producing long-term investment projects as opposed to consumer goods production.<br />
<br />
Then, he mentions an objection raised by Sir John Hicks. Hick argues that the traditional Austrian theory <i>cannot</i> be the explanation of depression because the economy, based on this theory, will <i>self-correct too quickly, </i>i.e., a serious investment boom could never really start up and get going. Resources would quickly shift back to the consumer goods industry from the longer-term investment projects and the "boom" in the longer-term investment area would quickly come to an end. However, since long-term investment booms <i>have started and have lasted for some time</i>, then there is obviously a problem with having a theory that does <i>not </i>allow for the boom phase to even get started.<br />
<br />
Then Ebeling mentions Roger W. Garrison's proposed solution to this problem. Garrison brings in ideas from the Monetarist school in order to "stick a time delay" into the model. Then, with this "time delay" a prolonged "investment boom" will occur, to be followed by the "bust" part of the business cycle.<br />
<br />
Here is how Ebeling puts it (all emphasis is mine):<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Garrison retells the Austrian story by taking his cue from the type of analysis used by the <b>Monetarists</b> in explaining how in the <b>short-run a monetary expansion can push unemployment and resource use BELOW the "natural rate of unemployment."</b> In the short-run, an economy always has some slack, even when it is operating at "full employment."</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Garrison argues an economy has the capability of <b>temporarily functioning BEYOND its "normal" full employment production possibilities.</b> This, he says, is what <u><b>enables the investment boom to continue for a significant period of time</b></u> before the "self-reversing" process of rising consumer demand brings the investment boom to a halt.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
The longer-term investment projects <b>CAN CONTINUE</b> for a prolonged period of time <b>because simultaneous with this, the short-term slack in the economy enables consumer goods production to expand as well,</b> delaying any reduced supply of consumer goods and a rise in their prices sufficient to swamp the investment boom.</blockquote>
Let me try to put this into my own words. In the <i>standard Austrian model </i>of depression here is what happens.<br />
<br />
<ol>
<li>The monetary authority expands the money supply and creates an artificially low market interest rate. </li>
<li>Investors (assuming "elastic expectations," i.e., investors will react to the lower interest rates and start investing in longer-term projects) are induced to borrow and invest in longer term projects (as opposed to shorter-term projects and consumer goods production)</li>
<li>To invest in these longer-term projects, they have to "bid away" resources (labor, tools, equipment) from the other shorter-term and consumer goods industries. </li>
<li>The factor owners (owners of the factors of production) in these longer-term industries are making really good large monetary incomes. They want to spend their money on <i>consumer goods.</i></li>
<li>The problem is this: if the factors of production have been shifted to longer term projects then obviously they are <i>not available to work on the shorter term and consumption goods projects.</i> In other words, if the workers and machines are all dedicated to building bridges they cannot be dedicated to building consumer goods. </li>
<li>So now the pent up demand for consumer goods will tend to bid up prices for consumer goods. Also, consumer goods manufacturers, seeing the potentially much higher prices, can bid up wages and other payments to factors <i>in order to shift the factors of production BACK to the consumer goods producing industries.</i></li>
</ol>
Now, Garrison wants to introduce a <b><i>"time delay" </i></b>into his model in order <b><i>to explain the prolonged investment boom. </i></b>To do so, he brings up this <b>Monetarist idea of SLACK in the economy.</b> With slack (e.g., marginal workers, people working overtime, factories being used below 100% of capacity and so on), <u><i><b>the economy can expand in BOTH sectors, i.e., the longer-term investment boom can happen AND more consumer goods can also be produced!</b></i></u> In the traditional version above, resources would have to "shift back" from the longer-term projects TO the consumer goods production section. But, if the economy can tap into this "slack," then the resources <u><i><b>DO NOT HAVE TO SHIFT BACK RIGHT AWAY.</b></i></u> The resources dedicated to the longer term projects can STAY THERE; the slack can fill the needs to produce the additional consumer goods demanded.<br /><br />That is my interpretation of what Ebeling wrote about Garrison's model. <br />
<i> </i><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
</blockquote>
<br />
<br />Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14408794074799022329noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6741330243979105436.post-84604763454428232602012-06-27T21:40:00.002-04:002012-06-27T21:40:48.130-04:00The Abe Simpson Version of Macroeconomics?This is a quotation from Richard M. Ebeling's article entitled <i>Austrian Macroeconomics: Review of Roger W. Garrison's Time and Money.</i> This quote reminds me of Abraham Simpson from the Simpsons show! See if you can guess why! In my own person life, I remember my grandpa telling me about his lived experiences in the Soviet Union (the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic). These stories certainly left a mark on me--when I think of communism, I think of how the total State starved my family members almost to death. Also, the discussion in Ebeling's quote is very relevant to today's economic situation: he is talking about the German hyperinflation of the early 1920s.<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
After an experience of credit expansion, inflation, and the business cycle, the memory remains, both of the details of how it has effected various people in their respective corners of the market and what they have learned about the mechanisms and consequences of government policy in general. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<u><b>Many Germans, over several generations, seemed to have retained a "living memory"--even when it was based on what <i>grandpa has told</i>--about the dangers of monetary abuse and hyperinflation</b></u> derived from the experiences of the early 1920s.</blockquote>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhnvhZebzxHAPymtaE_d6u-p93i-383H-WELZvOmAh1rHBQny4Sw-uCwq4jmAG7ABd7XNONgrOlm0KOKX97st23C65xiBFJvjYh3CEldy5mZ57CWJaBrshp3gcL1D8WVYn0k-6_j5acz3hM/s1600/Grandpa-Abe-Simpson.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhnvhZebzxHAPymtaE_d6u-p93i-383H-WELZvOmAh1rHBQny4Sw-uCwq4jmAG7ABd7XNONgrOlm0KOKX97st23C65xiBFJvjYh3CEldy5mZ57CWJaBrshp3gcL1D8WVYn0k-6_j5acz3hM/s1600/Grandpa-Abe-Simpson.jpeg" /></a></div>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14408794074799022329noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6741330243979105436.post-47708937462626474052012-06-26T21:35:00.000-04:002012-06-26T21:35:30.578-04:00The Role of Prices in a Free Market: The Hayekian Knowledge ProblemF. A. Hayek wrote about the importance of using the <b>price system as a coordination tool. </b> "Far from being appropriate only to comparatively simple conditions," Hayek writes in <i>The Road to Serfdom</i>, "it is the <b>very complexity</b> of the division of labor under modern conditions which makes <b>competition the only method </b>by which such <b>coordination can be adequately brought about.</b>" Then Hayek adds: "This is precisely what <b>the price system does under competition,</b> and which no other system even promises to accomplish. It enables entrepreneurs, by watching the movement of comparatively few prices...<b>to adjust their activities</b> to those of their fellows." (all emphasis mine)<br />
<br />
Richard M. Ebeling, in an article entitled <i>Austrian Macroeconomics: Review of Roger W. Garrison's Time and Money,</i> writes a very concise definition of <i><b>"the role of prices."</b></i> I want to put this up because I think it clearly explains why communism is impossible, i.e., why it is impossible to eliminate prices.<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
The <b>role of prices</b> under conditions of <b>imperfect knowledge</b> in markets with <b>continual change</b> is precisely to have an <b>institutional mechanism</b> that enables actors <b>to coordinate</b> their activities <b>WITHOUT their needing to possess ALL "the data" of the market as a whole.</b> Market actors <i><u>can use their special and localized knowledge</u></i> of time and place in the division of labor <u><b>WITHOUT ANY OF THEM POSSESSING THE GLOBAL KNOWLEDGE OF THE ENTIRE ECONOMIC SYSTEM.</b></u> (emphasis mine)</blockquote>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgSgisethunqYnldomAuWv-6kf1Ezk1Z5b5ikRP3uQeIzxrnKeBmugWR7UITkxILch8MUVPUGlgyn_md0gkURK8-xYG3q2ElhmqO2dRkqcyvWgnVsLSmAA2l5dOwRrJv1JpC2g3OBWqmCxh/s1600/Hayek7.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgSgisethunqYnldomAuWv-6kf1Ezk1Z5b5ikRP3uQeIzxrnKeBmugWR7UITkxILch8MUVPUGlgyn_md0gkURK8-xYG3q2ElhmqO2dRkqcyvWgnVsLSmAA2l5dOwRrJv1JpC2g3OBWqmCxh/s1600/Hayek7.jpg" /></a></div>
<br />Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14408794074799022329noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6741330243979105436.post-52677491328264921582012-06-21T00:00:00.003-04:002012-06-27T12:11:30.634-04:00It is NOT the People's Fault for the Plastic Bag Ban in Toronto<br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<b><u><span style="font-size: 16pt;">It is NOT the People's Fault</span></u></b></div>
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<b><u><span style="font-size: 16pt;"><br /></span></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Ah, the blame game.
Who is to blame for the recent plastic bag ban in Toronto? According to the <i>National Post</i>
article by Terence Corcoran, the list of possible suspects worthy of
condemnation is rather long. <br />
<br />
Maybe the science-be-damned environmentalists are out to get the evil plastic
industry. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Or maybe opportunistic small-time but power-hungry municipal
politicians are pouncing on the chance "to make their mark." How such slander that besmirches the
reputation of our normally "altruistic" politicians could be
published in a reputable newspaper is beyond me. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Or maybe these same municipal politicians are simply
"dumb" city councilors who place more value in the opinion of the
Easter Bunny than in studies and research.
Why waste time and money on conducting objective research when one can
simply appeal to the all-knowing wisdom of elected politicians. The divine-right of the city councilor is,
after all, a well established principle of political economy. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Or maybe The Retail Council is a spineless jellyfish that is
selling out the plastic industry due to its cowardice. If only it had a backbone to stand up to
these dumb and/or opportunistic city councilors, then something good might
happen in Toronto. <br />
<br />
Or maybe the prime suspect is the people themselves. As Mayor Rob Ford so eloquently put it, "it's the people's
fault." </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The mayor laments the lack of citizen engagement in
municipal politics. "People are
just sitting back and listening, but they don't pick up the phone, they don't
go down to city hall, they don't ask questions," he says.<br />
<br />
But the most obvious objection is simply this:
how can they, Mr. Mayor? Doesn't
the surprise nature of the vote make citizen "engagement" next to
impossible? When will the people get
the chance to organize an effective opposition if the city council pulls
surprise out-of-the-blue votes? The
city council is certainly not signaling much of an interest in encouraging
further citizen participation.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Of course, the mayor's comments may be directed not so much
at this particular incident with banning plastic bags as at a general apathy
towards municipal politics. The people
have tuned out; they have abdicated their responsibility to keep these city
councilors accountable. The people have
voted in terrible representation, and now they are doing nothing to correct
their earlier electoral mistake. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
To begin, there is no such thing as "the
people." The mayor might as well
blame Martians for the political problems in Toronto. There is no collective blob called "the people"; there
is no collective brain that does the thinking for the collective people; there
are, however, many individuals living within the monopoly territory called the
city of Toronto. So the problem the
mayor should be asking himself is, "why does an individual not care enough
to be engaged in municipal politics?"</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Maybe the reason why an individual just does not care is
because he or she feels powerless to bring about effective change. After all, the relationship between the city
and an individual is an <i>antagonistic.</i>
A citizen may not even be a voter; clearly he or she has given no
consent to any of these politicians, yet this citizen has no way to opt-out of
the decisions that the city council imposes upon him or her. The citizen is, in effect, living under the
communistic principle of majority rule.
He or she, as an individual, has no power; the fictitious
"will" of the majority must be obeyed. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Maybe the citizen realizes that he or she has absolutely no
way to financially control the behavior of his or her official representative,
who may very well be a person the citizen did not vote for in the first
place. A government, by definition,
cannot be held accountable by anyone because taxation is <i>not</i>
voluntary. The city does not send out
friendly flyers with pixies and leprechauns on them in order to encourage the
citizen to donate some love money to the city.
If the citizen doesn't pay then the city is not going to sit idly by;
the city will enforce its taxation bill.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
So far, the individual has no way to guarantee who his or
her representative will be because the individual has this communist philosophy
of majority rule imposed upon him or her.
Was the individual ever asked to sign up for such an arrangement? Nope.
One must begin by doubting whether any of this is a true expression of
individual consent, i.e., whether any of this "legitimizes" the
government. Moreover, the individual
has no way to financially control the city's behavior. This is because the city has effectively
said to every individual: you <i>don't</i>
own your property. Pay us your taxes or
you will be in trouble big time.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
So what does the mayor want an individual to do? Call a politician on the phone. Attend a meeting. Ask a question. Does the
city call you politely on the phone and ask for a friendly donation of funds to
pay for city's operations? Does the
city attend any public meetings or ask the people any questions? According to Corcoran's article, the city
couldn't be bothered to engage in a public review. Instead, the city has the power to use force against you. "Obey or die," said Trotsky. "Obey or lose your property," says
the city. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
This is <i>not</i> a fair fight. <i>This is a rigged game.</i>
And the game is rigged against the individual. That is the point. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In fact, the game is so rigged that each politician has a
vested interest in keeping things just the way they are now. We will not see a parade of politicians
swooping in to take advantage of this "opportunity" to increase individual
participation in municipal politics.
There will be no crusade to get people excited about municipal politics
as a result of this plastic bag ban. It
is against the individual self-interest of a politician to do so. Isn't it easier to rule over people who
passively submit than to rule over people who are monitoring your every move?</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
<br />
In conclusion, the mayor is wrong to blame the fictitious
phantom he calls "the people" for the Toronto city council's decision
to ban plastic bags. What he is doing is
that he is effectively blaming the victims for the crime. Instead, he should be attacking a system
without legitimate consent from all individuals, without any protection of
private property, without any way for an individual to financially control politicians,
and without any meaningful way for the individual to exercise his or her
will. The problem is ultimately that
the city council can use coercion on its subjects and impose a non-voluntary
outcome on them. With such an imbalance
of power, the people are not to blame.
The communistic rule by majority and voting are to blame. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhW2jdq_rpaUA0ypjE7U1Ojg95DltM__uahYHkDojBZCVXKvbM63BTylZhofDA5r9_SKUnUp1zNh_b84-MuyWUCd1IxtALh7oCr5pU3zJCfwZkPzIGfpxX-tN8XytpiquIxMFFYhg96SOgL/s1600/Toronto+Skyline,+July+6,+2011.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="86" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhW2jdq_rpaUA0ypjE7U1Ojg95DltM__uahYHkDojBZCVXKvbM63BTylZhofDA5r9_SKUnUp1zNh_b84-MuyWUCd1IxtALh7oCr5pU3zJCfwZkPzIGfpxX-tN8XytpiquIxMFFYhg96SOgL/s320/Toronto+Skyline,+July+6,+2011.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14408794074799022329noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6741330243979105436.post-43949068259695875052012-06-19T21:28:00.000-04:002012-06-30T18:27:27.876-04:00Hans-Hermann Hoppe on Original Appropriation of Bodies, Ethics, and ArgumentationThis is footnote 17 from Chapter 10 of Hans-Hermann Hoppe's <i>Democracy: The God That Failed; The Economics and Politics of Monarchy, Democracy, and Natural Order.</i> The reason why I am reproducing Dr. Hoppe's footnote is because I feel that these <i>core areas</i> do not receive enough attention on Facebook. The issues raised in this footnote are extremely important because they have such broad implications, yet seem to receive little to no Facebook coverage, at least not directly. The discussion of <i>original appropriation of bodies</i> forms the basis of <i>all property rights.</i> The discussion of <i>argumentation as a subcategory of human action</i> is a sophisticated way to refute socialism and its claims of being the "moral high ground."<br />
<br />
The first, initially outlined by Rothbard, proceeds via an <i>argumentum a contrario.</i> If, contrary to the principle of first or original appropriation, a person A were <i>not</i> considered the owner of his visibly (demonstrably, and intersubjectively ascertainably) appropriated body and the standing room and places originally (prior to everyone else) appropriated through him by means of his body, then only two alternative arrangements exist. Either <i>another</i> later-coming person B must be recognized as the owner of A's body and the places originally appropriated by A, or both A <i>and</i> B must be considered equal co-owners of all bodies and places.<br />
<br />
(The third conceivable alternative, that <i>no one</i> should own <i>any</i> body and originally appropriated place, can be ruled out as an impossibility. Acting <i>requires</i> a body and standing room and we cannot <i>not</i> act; hence, to adopt this alternative would imply the instant death of all of mankind).<br />
<br />
In the first case, A would be reduced to the rank of B's slave and subject of exploitation. B is the owner of the body and places originally appropriated by A, but A in turn is not the owner of the body and places so appropriated by B. Using this ruling, two categorically distinct classes of persons are constituted: slaves such as A and masters such as B, to whom different "laws" apply. Hence, while such a ruling is certainly <i>possible,</i> it must be discarded from the outset as a human ethic, equally and universally applicable for everyone <i>qua</i> human being (rational animal). For a rule to aspire to the rank of a law--a <i>just</i> rule--it is necessary that it apply equally and universally to everyone. The rule under consideration manifestly does not fulfill this universalization requirement.<br />
<br />
Alternatively, in the second case of universal and equal co-ownership the universalization requirement is apparently fulfilled. However, this alternative suffers from another, even more severe deficiency, because if it were adopted all of mankind would perish immediately, for every action of a person requires the use of scarce means (at least his body and its standing room). However, if all goods were co-owned by everyone, then no one at any time or place would be allowed to do anything unless he had previously secured everyone else's consent to do so. Yet how could anyone grant such consent if he were not the exclusive owner of his own body (including its vocal chords) by means of which this consent would be expressed? Indeed, he would first need others' consent in order to be allowed to express his own, but these others could not give their consent without first having his, etc. Thus, only the first alternative--the principle of original appropriation--is left. It fulfills the universalization requirement and it is praxeologically possible.<br />
<br />
The second argument, first advanced by this author [i.e., Hans-Hermann Hoppe] and yielding essentially the same conclusion, has the form of an impossibility theorem. The theorem proceeds from a logical reconstruction of the necessary conditions of <i>ethical </i>problems and an exact definition and delineation of the purpose of ethics. <br />
<br />
First, for ethical problems to arise <i>conflict</i> between separate and independent agents must exist (or must at least be possible); and a conflict can only emerge in turn with respect to <i>scarce means</i> or "economic" goods. A conflict is possible neither with respect to superabundant or "free" goods such as, under normal circumstances, the air that we breathe, nor with respect to scarce but non-appropriable goods such as the sun or the clouds, i.e., the <i>"conditions,"</i> rather than the <i>"means,"</i> of human action. Conflict is possible only with respect to controllable ("appropriable") means such as a specific piece of land, tree or cave situated in a specific and unique spatio-temporal relation <i>vis-à</i>-vis the sun and/or the rain clouds. <br />
<br />
Hence, the task of ethics is to propose rules regarding the "proper" versus the "improper" <i>use of scarce means.</i> That is, ethics concerns the assignment of rights of exclusive control over scarce goods, i.e., <i>property rights,</i>in order to rule out conflict. Conflict, however, is not a sufficient prerequisite for ethical problems, for one can come into conflict also with a gorilla or a mosquito, for instance, yet such conflicts do not give rise to <i>ethical</i> problems. Gorillas and mosquitoes pose merely a <i>technical</i> problem. We must learn how to successfully manage and control the movements of gorillas and mosquitoes just as we must learn to manage and control the inanimate objects of our environment. <br />
<br />
Only if both parties to a conflict are capable of propositional exchange, i.e., argumentation, can one speak of an ethical problem; that is, only if the gorilla and/or the mosquito could, in principle, pause in their conflictuous activity and express "yes" or "no," i.e., present an argument, would one owe them an answer.<br />
<br />
The impossibility theorem proceeds from this proposition in clarifying, first, its <i>axiomatic</i> status. No one can deny, without falling into performative contradictions, that the common rationality as displayed by the ability to engage in propositional exchange constitutes a necessary condition for ethical problems because this denial would itself have to be presented in the form of a proposition. Even an ethical relativist who admits the existence of ethical questions, but denies that there are any valid answers, cannot deny the validity of this proposition (which accordingly has been referred to also as the "<i>a priori</i> of argumentation"). <br />
<br />
Second, it is pointed out that everything that must be presupposed by argumentation cannot in turn be argumentatively disputed without getting entangled in a performative contradiction, and that among such presuppositions there exist not only <i>logical</i> ones, such as the laws of propositional logic (e.g., the law of identity), but also <i>praxeological</i> ones. Argumentation is not just free-floating propositions but always involves also at least two distinct <i>arguers,</i> a proponent and an opponent, i.e., <i>argumentation</i> is a subcategory of human <i>action.</i><br />
<br />
Third, it is then shown that the mutual recognition of the principle of original appropriation, by both proponent <i>and</i> opponent, constitutes the praxeological presupposition of argumentation. No one can propose anything and expect his opponent to convince himself of the validity of this proposition or else deny it and propose something else unless his and his opponent's right to exclusive control over their "own" originally appropriated body (brain, vocal chords, etc.) and its respective standing room were already presupposed and assumed as valid. <br />
<i> </i><br />
<i> </i>Finally, if the recognition of the principle of original appropriation forms the praxeological presupposition of argumentation, then it is impossible to provide a propositional justification for any other ethical principle without running thereby into performative contradictions.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhXNCJdv4wdV9nevr-YAI_HTKRnEPNeS5Vp6-Vt5p4yBGPGaQ7s9sR9Txp4h2ZVW5eJCLbsEa3addhATn0vZAC6mY2gteMzL8BFeQsbTd41p-gy6kpUDXAPYDRIBZMH8FxvOAVERmY87cJs/s1600/Hans+Hermann+Hoppe+Democracy+the+God+that+Failed+%282%29.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhXNCJdv4wdV9nevr-YAI_HTKRnEPNeS5Vp6-Vt5p4yBGPGaQ7s9sR9Txp4h2ZVW5eJCLbsEa3addhATn0vZAC6mY2gteMzL8BFeQsbTd41p-gy6kpUDXAPYDRIBZMH8FxvOAVERmY87cJs/s320/Hans+Hermann+Hoppe+Democracy+the+God+that+Failed+%282%29.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14408794074799022329noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6741330243979105436.post-1354013425676181652012-06-15T18:42:00.003-04:002012-06-15T18:44:27.666-04:00Dissecting the Media Spin on the Montreal Protests for "Free" College Tuition<br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<b><u><span style="font-size: 16pt;">Dissecting the Media Spin on
the Montreal Protests for "Free" College Tuition</span></u></b></div>
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<b><u><span style="font-size: 16pt;"><br /></span></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The CBC recently ran a story entitled <i>How a Student
Uprising Is Reshaping Quebec </i>by Jennifer Clibbon consisting of interviews
with two prominent francophone journalists and a political scientist, which is
available at: </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/story/2012/05/29/f-quebec-students-voices.html">http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/story/2012/05/29/f-quebec-students-voices.html</a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The interviewees have ascribed to the student protesters
near-hero like status. While the
student protesters are portrayed as being incapable of doing wrong, the
government of Quebec is portrayed as being incapable of doing anything
right. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I plan to first dissect this apologia for the student
protesters in order to show how completely ridiculous this entire CBC article
really is. After demolishing some of
the fallacious arguments made by the three interviewees, I will argue that these
student protesters are actually conformists calling out to the government of
Quebec to <i>enslave them further.</i>
If these students think they are fighting for "freedom" and
"rights," then they are sorely mistaken.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The article paints the students as being ultra-modern,
cutting-edge, world- and media-savvy, and on the cutting edge of technology,
which differentiate them from their old and outdated elected leaders. One interviewee goes so far as to assert
that the students are "better placed than their elders to imagine what
kind of education system our society needs to face the challenges of the
future." To further this point,
the article stresses how the youth see no future because of the dominance of
the older generations who will consume most of the tax revenues in the form of
health care costs and pensions. In
other words: the students are the
future while the elected leaders are the out-of-touch past.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
One of the most glaring problems with this past-future or
conservative government versus progressive students dichotomy is that the
student protesters have <i>not</i> offered one innovative, cutting-edge, or
modern solution to the education problem in Canada. If they were really revolutionaries "fighting the
Establishment," they would be offering us solutions such as privatizing
education in order to re-establish competition and choice in the education
system or they would be demanding that the leviathan bureaucracies and
teachers' unions be smashed. With such
private solutions, the student protesters could instead <i>peacefully negotiate</i>
the price of their education with various and competing service providers. But
no! Our revolutionaries, far from being
original thinkers daring enough to challenge the status quo, seem to be simply
recycling the old worn out ideas of the Syndicalists. The CBC article mentions that the student protesters use strikes,
boycotts, and picket lines and that there has been "violent actions on
campus against those who actively oppose the strike." How is this any different from the
definition of the Syndicalist approach advocated by George Sorel who wanted to
launch, under the name <i>action directe,</i> tactics such as riots, strikes,
general strikes, and sabotage? How this
can be called an "accelerated education in political culture" is
beyond me. If education is any sign of
civilized behavior then what we are witnessing is certainly the behavior of the
uneducated. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The media certainly enjoys portraying the student protests
as a <i>spontaneous uprising</i> of these young individuals. I have heard it used before by other Quebec
media sources and, unsurprisingly, this CBC article also mentions "the <i>spontaneous
demonstrations</i>." What is
rather humorous--one might say ironic--about this is that the term <i>spontaneous
ordering</i> is one of the most famous terms in economics of F. A. Hayek. But why on earth would a Hayekian term be
used to describe what these student protesters are doing? The sweet irony here is that our
anti-neo-liberal protesters--and if you ever watch CUTV they just love to
mention "neo-liberal" interminably--are using a term that <i>is
neo-liberal!!!</i> Don't our
"accessible" education freedom fighters know that Hayekian
economics--the evil neo-liberal economics that they hate so passionately--<i>is
all about the study of the spontaneous</i>--of what the student protesters
allegedly do! <i> </i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The CBC article also tries to portray the student protesters
as receiving a "<i>crash course</i> in rights and freedoms." Unfortunately for these student protesters,
even rampant grade inflation is not going to save them from failing this
course. What "rights" have
these students learned about from these never-ending nightly protests? Their "right" to use the coercive
taxing power of the state in order to provide them with a "free"
education paid for by the extortion of the vast majority of other people who
clearly oppose this plan? Their
"right" to shape the national identity, whatever that is supposed to
be? I suppose that is their supposedly
collective "right" to deny the individual his or her right to shape
his or her life however he or she sees fit.
Their "right" to "build a different world" without
first getting the explicit consent of all the other people affected by the
imposition of their grandiose plan?
Their "right" to set up picket lines and infringe upon the
egress rights of their fellow students?
Their "right" to unilaterally impede upon the use of private
property and to deny the owners the ability to earn legitimate incomes from the
use of their own property? Their
"right" to spout off the fallacious economic theories that they
learned into their introductory political science course, which then somehow
entitles them to demand that taxpayers pay for more of this
"education"? Their
"right" to the "new world" of social democracy? What rights have they learned? Nothing!!!
Not one. The most basic
characteristic of a society is the right to freely exchange. Nowhere in this article do these students
call for free exchange. Instead, they
place demands upon people to give them what they want at the end of the
government's gun and then have the temerity to claim that they are "not
slackers."</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Now, if they remain ignorant of rights, are they at least
conversant in the idea of freedom? Do
they know what freedom is? To
understand freedom, one must begin with the insight that <i>aggression is unjust.</i> When the state beats, shoots rubber bullets
at, harasses, and intimidates the peaceful protesters, is this not an act of
aggression against the bodies of these peaceful protesters? Yes, it is!
But what then do these student protesters want? They want free tuition! But who will pay for this education? Certainly not the students, they want the
government to pay for it all. But where
will the government in Quebec City get this money from? Will Ben "Helicopter" Bernanke
make a special trip with his helicopter to Quebec City in order to rain money
down on Jean Charest in order to solve his budgetary problems? Certainly not! The government in Quebec City will go to the taxpayers of Quebec
and force them to pay for something they do not want. Even the CBC article says that they do not want to pay for
this. "Against the students and
their allies," we are told, "there is a significant part of Quebec
society that doesn't support the protests (and the accompanying violence) and
approves of the increase in tuition."
So, it is wrong for the government to use aggression against the
allegedly peaceful protesters, but it is acceptable for the students to use the
aggression of the state's power to tax people against their will in order to
enrich themselves. Maybe the problem is
that the word "hypocrisy" has been confused with the word
"freedom"? </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The reason for all of this confusion is that the CBC article
assumes throughout that <i>education</i> is actually the "real" issue
being debated here. The debate has been
framed in terms of "access to education" with comments claiming that
"higher education [is] a vehicle for economic and social
'emancipation.'" The simplest way
to reply to this is to point out that <i>education is a phantom--it does not
exist in our public system.</i> In her
important contribution to the history of education, Charlotte Iserbyt saw this
problem right on page one of her massive study concerning the <i>Deliberate
Dumbing Down of America</i>. She
writes: "the philosophies of
Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Wilhelm Wundt, and John Dewey et al., reflect a total
departure from the traditional definition of education." Traditional education is as dead as a
Tyrannosaurus Rex. Moreover, in his
1931 Page-Barbour Lectures at the University of Virginia, Albert Jay Nock was <i>already
lamenting</i> the fact that <i>education </i>had already gone the way of the
dodo and had already been replaced by the "imposter system," i.e., <i>training.</i> So whatever these students are demanding of
the taxpayers of Quebec, it is certainly <i>not </i>education because education
does <i>not exist </i>today. What does
exist is the government's <i>monopoly on training.</i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
So what then <i>do these students want?</i> What these
students want is to be enslaved. To
make such a claim is certainly shocking and rightly so. They have failed to learn from one of the
greatest political philosophers of all time, Étienne de la Boétie who wrote of
the mindset of these Quebec students in his famous work <i>The Politics of
Obedience: The Discourse of Voluntary
Servitude.</i> La Boétie warned the French
of his day of the dangers of tyranny when he observed that <i>people are <b><u>trained
to adore rulers.</u></b></i> It is
fairly easy to see this parrot-like training of students in introductory
business courses. The economy is in a
depression, what should we do? The <i>government</i>
should intervene and spend! Too many
marketers are unscrupulous, what should we do?
The <i>government </i>should intervene and push some sort of
"social responsibility" agenda!
Prices are rising too quickly, what should we do? The <i>government</i> through its central
bank should intervene and slow down the rate of new money supply creation! The government has all the answers. The right answer to every question is <i>the
government knows best.</i> To put this
in terms that a teenager will certainly get:
the public "education" system is indistinguishable from the
system imposed by the Movementarian leadership on Edna Krabappel's
classroom. Do you really want to be in
a system in which Bart Simpson gets every answer right because the answer to
every question is "the Leader" did it?</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In conclusion, <i>training</i> has nothing to do with
"education"; <i>training</i> has everything to do with maintaining
the status quo, i.e., of locking in one ruling group. To call for more public "education," i.e., to call for
more <i>training</i> is, in essence, to call for more rulers, more conformity
to the parrot-like memorize and regurgitate system, and more tyranny over the
minds of men. This is not a system that
encourages the development of an original mind; this is a system that produces
trained automatons. If these students
really want a lesson in rights and freedoms they should ponder this
question: why do you want to uphold a
monopoly system--a monopoly over <i>your </i>mind--when monopoly <i>is</i> the
very antithesis of the freedom you supposedly are seeking?</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: right;">
NEIL M. TOKAR</div>
<div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: right;">
Niagara-on-the-Lake,
Ontario</div>
<div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: right;">
June 5, 2012</div>
<div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: right;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEirWLoSIL9X0WfWGivph4tnOC_qC6shuIMdxKwN9hSMm1PjUeKh5l7MrVBRVRajDtt0TJ_kZMYT7F8rh8fxe5h1u4uyXZxnsotEaEHD37CR2HFuUU2gPE5cwhaQKEg4U5EzlcZsN0tzNRcz/s1600/School+is+Prison+Break+Free.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEirWLoSIL9X0WfWGivph4tnOC_qC6shuIMdxKwN9hSMm1PjUeKh5l7MrVBRVRajDtt0TJ_kZMYT7F8rh8fxe5h1u4uyXZxnsotEaEHD37CR2HFuUU2gPE5cwhaQKEg4U5EzlcZsN0tzNRcz/s1600/School+is+Prison+Break+Free.jpeg" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14408794074799022329noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6741330243979105436.post-70845255038431864252012-06-15T13:22:00.001-04:002012-06-15T13:38:20.847-04:00My Rejoinder to Ed Finn's "Reform Capitalism or Scrap It?"<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:DoNotOptimizeForBrowser/>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]-->
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<b><u>Rejoinder to Ed
Finn's <i>Reform Capitalism or Scrap It?:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>It's not just the climate that's damaged by capitalism</i></u></b></div>
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>Introduction:</u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
This paper will critically analyze Ed Finn's article
entitled <i>Reform Capitalism or Scrap It?:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>It's not just the climate that's damaged by capitalism, </i>dated March
1, 2012 and available at:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.policyalternatives.ca/publications/monitor/reform-capitalism-or-scrap-it">http://www.policyalternatives.ca/publications/monitor/reform-capitalism-or-scrap-it</a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I plan to analyze the article from a market anarchist or
anarcho-capitalist perspective in order to provide an original critique of this
article published by the <i>Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives</i>.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The article being criticized is clearly
written for an audience of Marxists, socialists, and social democrats.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I suspect that few anarcho-capitalists will
ever read it because they most likely will reject the article as
radically-leftist propaganda, which distorts and misrepresents capitalism
deliberately in order to slander it.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I,
however, have taken the article seriously.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>I assume that the author is serious in his beliefs and arguments with no
evil or slanderous intentions in order to follow the approach taken by F. A.
Hayek;<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[i]</span></span>
consequently, I try to remain as detached and objective as possible when
addressing critically the author's laundry list of allegations against
capitalism.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The major arguments addressed in my paper are as follows:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<ul style="margin-top: 0in;" type="disc">
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l8 level1 lfo10; tab-stops: list .5in;">My
paper begins with some introductory remarks on terminology in order to
address potential confusion over the term "capitalism."<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The term has multiple connotations; the
readers of my article will quickly see that "capitalism" from a
market anarchist point of view and "capitalism" from the point
of view of Ed Finn are completely <i>different</i> terms with completely <i>different</i>
meanings.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In fact, from a market
anarchist perspective, capitalism does <i>not</i> exist in the current
world; instead, <i>socialism</i> is the <i>only</i> system in operation
today.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Since capitalism and
socialism are defined from this point of view in terms of <i>property
relations, </i>then the conclusion that our world is, in fact, suffering
from rampant socialism will be seen as self-evident.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></li>
</ul>
<ul style="margin-top: 0in;" type="disc">
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l9 level1 lfo9; tab-stops: list .5in;">Then,
my paper addresses the author's interpretation of "capitalist"
history in the twentieth-century.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>The author paints a picture of twentieth-century economic history
that follows a simply chain of events of the form bad, good, and then bad
making a comeback in order to suppress the previous good.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>To clarify, the author perceives a
world of unbridled capitalism, which got too greedy, and this
"unchecked greed" then caused the Great Depression in the
1930s.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Then, the good guys
intervene in order to rescued capitalism, apparently against its will, by
adopting the "caring and sharing" system of Keynesian
economics.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The world was now a
better place; the forces of good beat those of evil.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>But then the forces of darkness
regrouped and nefariously overthrew the nirvana of Keynesian economics by
restoring the "rapacious" system of laissez-faire capitalism.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Consequently, the current world
situation is once again laissez-faire capitalism, which is spiraling out
of control, once again, but the good guys will save the world from the
coming capitalist apocalypse of "global warming" by instituting
a world government.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>My article
argues that this interpretation of the history of the twentieth-century is
incorrect because laissez-faire capitalism was already effectively dead at
the beginning of the twentieth-century because of deliberate government
interventions designed to placate existing big businesses.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The claim that Keynesian economics was
some sort of salvation for the little guy, a protection of the weak from
the strong, is addressed and attacked by examining the fact that Keynesian
economics is establishment economics with a built-in tendency to favor the
interests of both commercial and investment bankers.</li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l9 level1 lfo9; tab-stops: list .5in;">Playing
off the currently popular 1% versus 99% rhetoric, the author of the
article brings up the "concentration of wealth" issue, which he
will solve by transferring the resources of all the governments of the
world to one central world government.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>I address the obvious logical contradiction of trying to solve one
"concentration" problem by creating an even larger one.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Moreover, I point out why the author's
"one big cartel" solution is theoretically impossible; his
solution cannot work because it will lead to a rational economic
calculation problem.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I conclude
this section by utilizing a historical illustration from the Soviet
Union's disastrous attempt to create the "one big cartel" in the
late 1910s.</li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l9 level1 lfo9; tab-stops: list .5in;">Then,
I address the numerous problems in the author's assertion that our current
global economy is, in fact, the paragon of free trade.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The author of the article takes it for
granted that the current world is "obviously" an example of the
free-market mentality, which is out of control because the market has been
"unshackled" from its beneficial Keynesian restraints.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>From the market anarchist perspective,
the current situation is "obviously" <i>not</i> an example of
the free-market mentality; the current world is an "obvious
example" of conservative socialism and social democratic
socialism.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The reason for the
confusion, as will be explained, is that the author of the article fails
to distinguish a bureaucratically <i>managed trade</i> system from a <i>genuinely
free</i> (i.e., voluntary, without government) trade system.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l9 level1 lfo9; tab-stops: list .5in;">The
author of the article then levels an extended attack against <i>competition</i>
by accusing it of causing numerous problems in the world, such as poverty,
war, wealth concentration, and waste of resources.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Lurking in the background of the
author's article, I suspect, is a Marxist assumption that capitalists are
suicidal in their interminable drive to "accumulate"
capital.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>To starve off the day of
reckoning, i.e., to postpone all the nasty effects of
"competition," capitalists supposedly engage in wars and
imperialism.<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[ii]</span></span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>To address the author's claims against
competition, I begin by explaining why it is <i>impossible </i>to
eliminate competition so long as humans <i>act,</i> i.e., so long as
humans attempt to substitute a better state of affairs for a worse
one.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Then, I address the
accusations made by the author of the article in a point-by-point rebuttal
format in order to show that the author's self-evident claims are not so
self-evident after all.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I examine
how monetary policy manipulation--not capitalism--instigated economic wars
in the 1930s that then fomented the armed conflicts of World War II, how
American banking history from as early as the 1860s showed ongoing and
deliberate attempts to <i>suppress </i>competition through various forms
of government-granted privileges, why the highly dynamic and unpredictable
nature of a free-market made the maintenance and concentration of wealth <i>impossible,</i>
why free-markets were beneficial to the poor as illustrated by Robert
LeFevre's statistical study of wealth distribution before and after the
Industrial Revolution, and how a free market avoided warfare through the
implementation of the harmony of interests concept, which stands in sharp
contrast to the competing concept called the Montaigne dogma.</li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l9 level1 lfo9; tab-stops: list .5in;">I then
address the author's bizarre claim that capitalism is based upon the
assumptions of limitless growth and limitless resources.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The author's claims are obviously meant
to imply that capitalism is destroying the earth by causing an
environmental catastrophe; this environmental apocalypse, which will
destroy civilization, can only be thwarted through the author's proposed
solutions of world government and curtailing economic growth.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The author's argument is bizarre
because socialist propaganda has always proposed that it would create a
"world of plenty" (i.e., limitless growth of goods) if only
capitalist production with its "artificial scarcity" could be
halted.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Capitalism cannot be both
simultaneously <i>suppressing</i> the supply of goods by creating scarcity
and <i>overproducing </i>the supply of goods by engaging in limitless
growth.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l9 level1 lfo9; tab-stops: list .5in;">Next,
I examine the author's "animistic" or "by design"
world view.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>He seems to think, not
surprisingly, that a capitalist conspiracy is afoot in the world
today.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In reply, I examine the
history of early capitalism in order to stress that capitalism was born
not by deliberate design but by a spontaneous ordering in an anarchistic
environment.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l9 level1 lfo9; tab-stops: list .5in;">The
last issue I address is the author's inconsistent "moral high
ground" argument.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Socialism,
the author's preferred solution, was born as a totalitarian reaction
against the liberalism of the French Revolution; thus, the author's
"self-evident" claim to a "moral high ground" is very
suspicious.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I conclude by noting
the obvious self-refuting nature of the entire article.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>At the beginning of the article,
capitalism's collapse is <i>inevitable, </i>but by the end of the article,
<i>deliberately organizing</i> a plan to overthrow capitalism is now
needed.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></li>
</ul>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>Issues Regarding the Use of the Term <i>"Laissez-Faire
Capitalism"</i>:</u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The fundamental essence of market anarchy is expressed by
Hans-Hermann Hoppe as "a pure private property society, an anarchy of
private property owners, regulated exclusively by private property law."<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[iii]</span></span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>From this perspective, capitalism and
socialism are defined in terms of <i>property</i> with </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<i>socialism</i> being an
institutionalized policy of aggression against property, and <i>capitalism</i>
being an institutionalized policy of the recognition of property and
contractualism [i.e., non-aggressive relationships between property owners].<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[iv]</span></span>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Contrary to the assertions of the author of the article,
this property-based definition does <i>not</i> imply that capitalism is biased
in favor of "big business."<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Capitalism opposes what F. A. Hayek calls the socialists of "all
parties," including the privilege-seeking protectionist behavior displayed
by many big businesses.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>"There is
some justification," writes Hayek, "in the taunt that many of the <i>pretending
defenders of 'free enterprise'</i> [emphasis added] are in fact defenders of
privileges and advocates of government activity."<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[v]</span></span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>To grant <i>any</i> government privilege to <i>anyone</i>
(rich or poor) for <i>any </i>reason is to engage in private property
violations, i.e., to engage in socialism.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Given such a definition of capitalism, which certainly is
not how the term is construed by socialists,<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[vi]</span></span>
one must conclude that <i>capitalism does NOT</i> <i>exist</i> in our current
world.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The modern world is, by
definition, nothing but violations of private property rights because the
modern world is still <i>populated by states</i> and states are by definition <i>property
violators</i>.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Murray N. Rothbard
summarizes the inherently <i>anti-capitalistic </i>nature of the state when he
writes that</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
the State necessarily lives by the
compulsory confiscation of private capital, and since its expansion necessarily
involves ever-greater incursions on private individuals and private enterprise,
we must assert that the State is profoundly and inherently <i>anti</i>capitalist.<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[vii]</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The protection of private property is, in fact, illusory in
our statist world because each government continues to possess not only a
judicial monopoly over its territory but also the involuntary power to tax
property.<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[viii]</span></span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Therefore, from a market anarchist
perspective, the author of the article is mistaken when he continually blames
all of the problems in the world on capitalism.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Capitalism <i>does not exist</i> in the current world because the
existing institutional arrangements are inherently anti-property in their
nature; socialism, i.e., aggression against property, <i>is</i> what exists in
the current world.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>Historical Problems Regarding the Interpretation of
the American Depression in the 1930s, Keynesian Economics, and the Post-World
War II Period up to the Present:</u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The author presents an interpretation of economic history,
beginning with the American Depression in the 1930s.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The author's major points are as follows:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<ul style="margin-top: 0in;" type="disc">
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l7 level1 lfo2; tab-stops: list .5in;">Capitalism,
plagued by "avarice" [i.e., by "greed"] and financial
"knavery," caused the Great Depression of the 1930s</li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l7 level1 lfo2; tab-stops: list .5in;">Capitalism
was then "saved" apparently against its will thanks to the
"caring and sharing" concepts of John Maynard Keynes</li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l7 level1 lfo2; tab-stops: list .5in;">A
wonderful world was unleashed, which included income being more
"fairly" distributed, more labor unionization, better wages and
working conditions for labor, and more social programs financed by
"progressive" taxation</li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l7 level1 lfo2; tab-stops: list .5in;">But
the rapacious capitalists fought back by breaking their "Keynesian
shackles" and then re-established their "ruthless" system
of capitalism</li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l7 level1 lfo2; tab-stops: list .5in;">This
"ruthless" system of capitalism now is completely out of control
causing every conceivable calamity including a global environmental crisis
</li>
</ul>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
To begin, the author's assertion that capitalism was
"running amok" immediately prior to the Great Depression is
historically incorrect.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In reality,
laissez-faire capitalism never existed in its pure form for the most part; a
quasi-version did exist but was intentionally suppressed starting in the
Progressive Era of American history, i.e., the suppression preceded the 1930s
by decades.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Consider Gabriel Kolko's
reinterpretation of the Progressive Era in the United States, roughly covering
the period from the second half of the 1800s to 1916.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Kolko states bluntly that "the federal government was <i>always</i>
involved in the economy in various crucial ways, and that <i>laissez faire
NEVER EXISTED </i>[emphasis added] in an economy where local and federal
governments financed the construction of a significant part of the railroad
system."<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[ix]</span></span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In fact, the Progressive Era was dominated
by the leaders of big business <i>deliberately suppressing free-market
competition.</i><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Continuing with Kolko,
the lesson from history is that large corporations seek and receive government
regulations as a form of protectionism because the existing large corporations
are <i>afraid of capitalism in its pure form.</i><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Kolko notes that "although there was a formal commitment to
varieties of laissez faire economic theory in most of the academic world, <i>big
businessmen developed their own functional doctrine very much opposed to
competition</i> [emphasis added] as either a desirable mechanism or as a
goal."<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[x]</span></span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The rest of Kolko's study explains how the
leaders of big business (including the big banks) went about deliberately
shutting down capitalism and replacing it with a government-protected monopoly
system.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Because "competition was
unacceptable to many key business and financial interests,"<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xi]</span></span>
and because various voluntary attempts to restrict competition had all failed,<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xii]</span></span>
the leaders of big business deliberately turned to the government for a
political solution to their capitalist problem.<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xiii]</span></span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>These observations pertaining to the
deliberate government sponsored suppression of competition were made again by
F. A. Hayek regarding the Great Depression when he writes that "anyone who
has observed how aspiring monopolists regularly seek and frequently obtain the
assistance of the power of the state to make their control effective can have
little doubt that there is nothing inevitable about this development."<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xiv]</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The period from roughly 1900 to 1930 was <i>not</i> a period
of unbridled capitalist greed characterized by unregulated markets.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>On the contrary, it was a period of
centralizing and consolidating power.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>The end of the first World War brought about a shift from Marxist
ideology to a system of "planning."<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Ludwig von Mises mentions this important turning point in the history of
the West when he writes that</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
the attitude of the German
"majority socialists" adopted in 1918 and 1919 marks a turning point
in the socialist movement in the countries of Western industrial
civilization.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The nationalization issue
receded more and more into the background....With all other foes of the market
economy the party cry is now "planning."<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xv]</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Moreover, during this 1900-1930 period, centralized global
coordination of the economy began.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The
most obvious example is the birth of central bank coordination between the New
York Federal Reserve and the Bank of England.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Writing about the coordinated control of the economies of both America
and Europe by their respective central banks, Murray N. Rothbard notes that </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
less well known is the fact that
close collaboration between Benjamin Strong, Governor of the Federal Reserve
Bank of New York, and Montagu Norman, head of the Bank of England, began much
earlier....As early as 1916, Strong began private correspondent relations with
the Bank of England, as well as with other European Central Banks.<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xvi]</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Thanks to all of these earlier government and central bank
interventions, the economic situation did not look even remotely like
laissez-faire capitalism on the eve of the American Great Depression.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In fact, a centrally coordinated system in
banking existed domestically in the United States in addition to the global
coordination spearheaded by Benjamin Strong.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Murray N. Rothbard writes about the obviously anti-laissez-faire
economic situation that existed in the spring of 1929:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
As Bernard M. Baruch explained in
an optimistic interview in the spring of 1929, they [i.e., the new tools for
central control] were (a) <i>expanded cooperation between government and
business </i>[emphasis added]; and (b) the Federal Reserve Act, "which
gave us <i>coordinated control of our financial resources and...a unified
banking system</i> [emphasis added]."<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xvii]</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Now compare this 1929 centrally coordinated banking system
to the pre-Federal Reserve System as described by Gabriel Kolko, i.e., a system
of <i>relatively decentralized and competitive banking</i> compared with what
happened later in American history.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Kolko describes the operation of a pre-central bank banking industry,
which was marked by a rise in <i>choice and a decrease in the relative power of
New York banks</i>:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
But had the complete centralization
of capital been the dominant fact of the financial structure at the beginning
of this century [i.e., the twentieth century], the <i>proliferation of new
entries into most industries and the failure of the merger movement to
establish industrial control</i> [emphasis added] would be inexplicable.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>For central finance would have withheld
funds from undesirable competitors.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Clearly, a much more complex situation existed, and the extent of this
complexity has not been fully appreciated.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span><i>The crucial fact of the financial structure at the beginning of this
century was the relative decrease in New York's financial significance and the
rise of many alternate sources of substantial financial power </i>[emphasis
added].<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xviii]</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Therefore, the author's assertion that capitalism existed in
the late 1920s and then caused the Great Depression in the 1930s is wrong
because capitalism never existed in a pure form and the relatively free-market
system that had existed was destroyed in the Progressive Era.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Continuing with the author's description of twentieth
century economic history, the claim that Keynesian economics was instituted out
of benevolent "caring and sharing" motives is rather shocking.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Keynesian economics has nothing to do with
benevolent altruism as the author of the article seems to believe.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The fact is that Keynesianism is "the
pure economics of power, committed only to keeping the Establishment-system
going."<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xix]</span></span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>From roughly the 1930s to the early 1970s,
"Keynesianism rode high in the economics profession <i>and in the
corridors of power in Washington</i> [emphasis added]."<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xx]</span></span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The most obvious question is "why would
bankers and establishment players want Keynesian economics?"<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The most obvious answer is that they benefit
the most from perpetual deficit financing, i.e., large deficits during
recessions and smaller deficits during booms.<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xxi]</span></span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>How do bankers benefit from the Keynesian
policy of interminable deficit financing?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>The answer to this question is provided by Rothbard in a discussion on
why the interests of <i>both</i> commercial <i>and</i> investment banks are
advanced by statism and deficits.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Rothbard explains why the establishment players want Keynesian economics
when he writes that</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<i>bankers are inherently inclined
toward statism </i>[emphasis added].</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><i>Commercial</i>
bankers, engaged as they are in unsound fractional reserve credit, are, in the
free market, always teetering on the edge of bankruptcy.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Hence they are <i>always reaching for
government aid and bailout</i> [emphasis added].</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><i>Investment</i>
bankers do much of their business underwriting government bonds, in the United
States and abroad.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Therefore, <i>they
have a vested interest in promoting deficits</i> [emphasis added] and in
forcing taxpayers to redeem government debt.<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xxii]</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Therefore, based on considerations of the self-interest of
commercial and investment bankers, the claim that Keynesian economics was
intended to further "shackle" capitalism is, in fact, <i>correct</i>.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The stated 1936 goal of Keynesian economics
was to defend two untenable economic policies, namely, inflationism and labor
unionism; neither was conducive to capitalism.<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xxiii]</span></span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>To accomplish these anti-capitalist goals,
Keynesian economics resurrected the old ideas held by the so called
"monetary cranks":</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
Keynes did not add any new idea to
the body of inflationist fallacies, a thousand times refuted by
economists.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>His teachings were even
more contradictory and inconsistent than those of his predecessors who, like
Silvio Gesell, were dismissed as monetary cranks.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>He merely knew how to cloak the plea for inflation and credit
expansion in the sophisticated terminology of mathematical economics.<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xxiv]</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The death of Keynesian economics was <i>not </i>caused by
some sort of capitalist conspiracy to reestablish the "rapacious"
system that supposedly existed prior to the Great Depression.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Keynesian economics died in the 1970s
because <i>reality</i> demonstrated that the Keynesian theory was wrong; the
Keynesian theory was unable to explain what was happening in the real
world.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>"In the early and the late
1970s," writes Rothbard, "the wind was taken out of their sails by
the arrival of <i>inflationary recession</i> [emphasis added], a phenomenon
which they not only failed to predict, but whose very existence <i>violates the
fundamental tenets of the Keynesian system</i> [emphasis added]."<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xxv]</span></span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Rothbard explains the paradox of
Keynesianism when applied to the real world problem of an inflationary
recession:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
For if the government was supposed
to step on the spending accelerator during recessions, and step on the brakes
during booms, what in blazes is it going to do if there is a steep recession
(with unemployment and bankruptcies) and a sharp inflation <i>at the same time?</i><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>What can Keynesianism say?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><i>Step on both accelerator and brake at the
same time</i> [emphasis added]?<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xxvi]</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The author's thesis is, in the final analysis, simply of the
form:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>bad era, good era, and a return
to another bad era, with the good era consisting of big government intervening
in the economy perpetually and the bad eras consisting of a lack of government
meddling in the economy.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>What the
author of the article completely ignores is the fact that the economic history
of the twentieth century was influenced heavily by <i>ongoing interventions in
the form of imposed monetary orders.</i><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>The claim that parts of the twentieth-century lacked regulations over
the economy is simply not true.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The
world experienced a flip-flopping between two different and competing <i>establishment</i>
monetary systems, i.e., between the Keynesian and the Friedmanite monetary
orders.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The world flip flopped between
the Keynesian fixed exchange rate system combined with international economic
coordination and a Friedmanite fiat money system with relative values of
currencies fluctuating in accordance with supply and demand but still a
governing central bank existed.<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xxvii]</span></span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Contrary to the author's claim, which
suggests that Keynesian economics is the salvation of the poor and destitute, <i>both
systems are establishment systems, i.e., neither system is meant to help the
poor or working classes.</i><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Therefore,
the author's interpretation of the economic history of the twentieth century
has been exposed as spurious.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>The Impossibility of the "One Big Global
Cartel" Solution to the Alleged Global Warming Crisis:</u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The author makes two contradictory claims.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<ul style="margin-top: 0in;" type="disc">
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo3; tab-stops: list .5in;">First,
he claims to be opposed to the concentration of power into the hands of a
few individuals by citing some examples of how the capitalists of today
have done so already.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The
"plutocrats at Davos," "the top 1%" who refuse to
"share among the 99%," now possess "immense power."</li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo3; tab-stops: list .5in;">Second,
he claims to want to establish a world government in order to save
humanity from the global warming crisis allegedly caused by capitalism and
its "overproduction" of carbon dioxide emissions.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>He writes, <i>"the world's
governments should be joined together, pooling their resources</i>
[emphasis added], and making the campaign against global warming their top
priority."<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></li>
</ul>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The author has fallen into a classic trap of Marxism or
state socialism, namely, he wants to solve an alleged monopoly problem (i.e.,
the monopoly capitalist problem) by creating an even bigger and more
centralized monopoly (i.e., a world government).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The American individualist anarchist Benjamin Tucker nicely
summarizes the self-refuting nature of the position taken by the author of the
article:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
Marx, its [i.e., State Socialism's]
founder, concluded that the only way to abolish the class monopolies was to
centralize and consolidate all industrial and commercial interests, all
productive and distributive agencies, in one vast monopoly in the hands of the
State.... Competition must be utterly wiped out.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>All industrial and commercial activity must be centered in one
vast, enormous, all-inclusive monopoly.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>The remedy for <i>monopolies</i> is <i>monopoly.</i><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xxviii]</span></span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In addition to the logical contradiction of trying to solve
a monopoly problem by creating an even bigger monopoly, the author's proposed
solution, which consists of a global government with the pooling of all the
resources of all the world's governments at one central global control point,
is both historically and theoretically <i>infeasible.</i><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The author is probably unaware of the fact
that his article sounds similar to 1920-1930 era economics, such as the Soviet
experiment and the Hayek-Lange-Dickinson debates at the London School of
Economics with the earlier Misesian article<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span><i>Economic Calculation in the Socialist Commonwealth</i> certainly
instigating much of this later debate.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
From a theoretical perspective, the idea of pooling all the
resources of the world's governments is addressed in modern times by Murray N.
Rothbard under the label "The One Big Cartel Problem."<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Rothbard discusses not only the <i>calculability</i>
problem faced by any attempt to establish a global cartel but also the <i>long-term
instability</i> problem faced by a global cartel once established.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Rothbard writes that </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
in order to calculate the profits
and losses of each branch, a firm must be able to refer its internal operations
to <i>external markets</i> for <i>each</i> of the various factors and
intermediate products.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>When any of
these external markets disappears, because all are absorbed <i>within</i> the
province of a single firm, calculability disappears, and there is no way for
the firm rationally to allocate factors to that specific area.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The more these limits are encroached upon,
the greater and greater will be the sphere of irrationality, and the more
difficult it will be to avoid losses.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>One big cartel would not be able rationally to allocate producers' goods
at all and hence could not avoid severe losses.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Consequently, it could never really be established, and, if
tried, would quickly break asunder.<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xxix]</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The calculability and instability concerns raised by
Rothbard are not news to someone familiar with economic history.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In fact, Rothbard's entire argument is
simply a restatement of arguments made by at least three major writers, namely,
Boris Brutzkus, Max Weber, and Ludwig von Mises in the 1920-21 time period.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The impossibility of rational economic
calculation under a scenario that pools all resources under one central global
government can be seen by starting with the Soviet experiment and then thinking
about whether this experiment could be replicated on a global scale.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The eminent economist F. A. Hayek mentions
in one of his many papers on this socialist calculation problem that </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
Boris Brutzkus, a distinguished
economist mainly known for his studies in the agricultural problems of Russia,
subjected to a searching criticism in a series of lectures the doctrines
governing the action of the Communist rulers....Like Professor Mises and Max
Weber, his criticism centers round <i>the impossibility of a rational
calculation in a centrally directed economy from which prices are necessarily
absent</i> [emphasis added].<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xxx]</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The theoretical prediction that economic chaos will be the
result of the "one big cartel" scenario with its inherent inability
to engage in rational calculation is further confirmed when the historical
record regarding attempts to implement the theory in practice is
consulted.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>When the factors of
production are nationalized into what amounts to a national level "one big
cartel," factor prices cannot form because no market exists on which the
factors of production can be bought and sold.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>The resulting economic chaos was best illustrated by the events in
Bolshevik Russia.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Murray N. Rothbard
mentions how full-blown communism did not work forcing the communists to
backtrack on their plans:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
When the Bolsheviks assumed power
in late 1917, they tried to leap into full "communism" by abolishing
money and prices, an experiment so disastrous (it was later dubbed "War
Communism") that Lenin, always the supreme realist, beat a hasty retreat
to a mere semisocialist system in the New Economic Policy (NEP).<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xxxi]</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In conclusion, the author's proposal, presented with the
mellifluous terms of "cooperation," "equity," and
"social justice," is inoperable in the real world.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The author has presented a completely
utopian solution for solving the alleged capitalist-made global warming
crisis.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The lessons of both theory and
history advise against implementing the author's proposal to establish a world
government meant to control the pooled resources of humanity.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>The Bogeymen of "Free Trade" and of
"Free-Market Global Economy" Existing Today:</u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The author repeatedly attacks both free trade and the global
economy with calls for their abolition.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>The author makes the following statements with regard to the issue of
free trade.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<ul style="margin-top: 0in;" type="disc">
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l3 level1 lfo7; tab-stops: list .5in;">but as
soon as <i>free trade </i>[emphasis added], deregulation, privatization,
and new world-spanning technologies enabled them to break the Keynesian
shackles, they quickly re-established capitalism</li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l3 level1 lfo7; tab-stops: list .5in;">the <i>free-market
ideology</i> [emphasis added] that has dominated the <i>global economy</i>
[emphasis added] for more than three decades</li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l3 level1 lfo7; tab-stops: list .5in;">cancelling
most <i>free trade agreements</i> [emphasis added]</li>
</ul>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The author makes two major mistakes in his discussion of
free trade.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>First, he erroneously
assumes that free trade actually exists today; in reality, genuine free trade
does <i>not </i>exist currently.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The
author makes this mistake because he fails to distinguish between <i>mercantilism
</i>and <i>true free trade</i>.<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xxxii]</span></span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Second, the author is wrong when he claims
that a <i>free-market ideology</i> governs our <i>global economy.</i><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>To improve upon the author's analysis, a
look at both the <i>social democratic ideology</i> and the <i>conservative
socialist ideology</i> is in order, especially with regard to the issue of
redistributing property titles.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The first point to be made is that genuine free trade does <i>not</i>
exist today.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>To make this point starkly
clear, a look at the early history of free trade is in order.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The rise of a class of free traders under
the feudal system is an example of a group of people trying to <i>avoid</i>
government interventions in their private affairs by effectively ignoring the
artificial international boundaries of states.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>As Hans-Hermann Hoppe documents,</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
there was resistance to this
[feudal] system.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Interestingly enough
though (from a present-day perspective), it was not the peasant population who
suffered most from the existing order, but <i>the merchants and traders who
became the leading opponents of the feudal system</i> [emphasis added].<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Buying at a lower price in one place and
traveling and selling at a higher price in a different place, as they did, made
their <i>subordination to any one feudal lord relatively weak</i> [emphasis
added].<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>They were essentially a class
of "international" men, crossing the borders of various feudal
territories constantly.<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xxxiii]</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Free trade, then, implies a situation in which international
movements of both goods and people take place <i>without</i> regard to
government or their boundary lines.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Simply put, "under a system of completely free trade, capital and
labor would be employed wherever conditions are most favorable for
production"<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xxxiv]</span></span> with
both capital and labor moving across borders without any artificial obstacles
getting in their way.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Now by distinguishing between genuine free trade and <i>government-managed
trade,</i> Ron Paul not only helps to clarify what is actually happening in the
current environment but also helps to illustrate where the author of the
article is in error:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
To establish genuine free trade, no
such transfer of power [by the United States to the World Trade Organization]
is necessary.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><i>True free trade does
not require treaties or agreements between governments</i> [emphasis
added].<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>On the contrary, true free
trade occurs in the <i>absence</i> of government intervention in the free flow
of goods across borders.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><i>Organizations
like the WTO and NAFTA represent government-managed trade schemes, not free trade</i>
[emphasis added].<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xxxv]</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The extent of these <i>government-managed trade schemes </i>to
<i>regulate, not deregulate</i> economies as the author alleges<i>,</i> is
illustrated nicely by Murray N Rothbard.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>He writes that</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
externally, the EC [European
Community] can and <i>does use its power to raise general tariffs with nations
outside the bloc</i> [emphasis added].<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>But even <i>internally, the result has increased trade restrictions and
regulations</i> [emphasis added] inside the bloc.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Thus, the EC has been building a burgeoning European super-government
and bureaucracy in Brussels, that <i>has often increased regulation throughout
the area </i>[emphasis added]<i>.</i><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>One pernicious measure of the EC has been to require low-tax countries
in Europe to raise their taxes so as to make sure that each country enjoys a <i>"fair
and level playing field"</i> [emphasis added] with the others.<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xxxvi]</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The fact that the European Community, the "noble
example of a vast regional free-trade area,"<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xxxvii]</span></span>
engages in a policy of <i>equalization</i> in order to create a <i>"fair
and level playing field"</i> demonstrates, contrary to the claim of the
author of the article, that <i>no alleged free-market ideology is at work.</i><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Instead of a free market ideology, <i>a
social democratic ideology</i> is in existence today, which is obvious because
of the ongoing emphasis on <i>equalization </i>in the context of these alleged
"free-trade deals."<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Equalization signals that the social democracy ideology is at work today
because social democracy is defined as "income taxation and <i>equalization</i>
[emphasis added], and, ... <i>equalization of opportunity</i> [emphasis added],
as being the true cornerstones of socialism."<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xxxviii]</span></span><span style="background: fuchsia; mso-highlight: fuchsia;"></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
To further illustrate the <i>anti-free-market ideology</i>
inherent in free trade agreements, a look at the position taken by Jeffrey
Tucker, a laissez-faire economist, is valuable. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Notice that Tucker stresses two important points.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>First, "free-trade agreements" are
a form of mercantilism.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Second, contrary
to the claim made by the author of the article, the Keynesian
"shackles" have <i>not</i> been broken by the rapacious capitalists;
on the contrary, <i>Keynesian planning</i> is alive and well in the form of
these so called "free-trade agreements."<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Tucker captures these two points nicely by writing that </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
the Mises Institute has
consistently favored free trade--the real thing--while criticizing <i>"free-trade
agreements" as mercantilism in disguise</i> [emphasis added].<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The position is a lonely one...even battling
<i>as forms of Keynesian planning</i> [emphasis added].<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>So there is a tradition here that would lead
modern Austrians [i.e., members of the Austrian School of Economics] to oppose
efforts like the North American Free Trade Agreement and all the others that
have followed.<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xxxix]</span></span><i> </i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
As a final illustration of this <i>anti-free-market ideology</i>
point, Llewellyn H. Rockwell Jr. notes that organizations such as the World
Trade Organization are designed explicitly to <i>regulate</i> the global
economy.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>He observes that the WTO has
nothing to do with genuine free trade but rather everything to do with what
sounds very similar to World War II era calls for World Planning or
International Planning combined with talk of international agreements and <i>regulations
</i>[emphasis added].<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xl]</span></span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Rockwell writes on this global economic
regulation issue that</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
the WTO incorporates legal
mechanisms <i>for regulating the world economy</i> [emphasis added]...the
original charter included a tip-of-the-hat to these special-interest concerns.<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xli]</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The idea of regulating the entire world economy has nothing
to do with laissez-faire capitalism or the free-market ideology.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>What is being described here is actually an
example of what Hans-Hermann Hoppe calls <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">conservative
socialism.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></i><span style="mso-bidi-font-style: italic;">Conservative socialism consists of policies that attempt "to
preserve the status quo through </span><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">economic
and behavioral regulations</i><span style="mso-bidi-font-style: italic;">
[emphasis added] and price controls."<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xlii]</span></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-bidi-font-style: italic;">Therefore, the author
is grossly mistaken if he believes that our current situation ought to be
classified as an example of free-market ideology.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>A better classification would stress the </span><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">social democratic </i><span style="mso-bidi-font-style: italic;">and </span><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">conservative socialist</i><span style="mso-bidi-font-style: italic;">
ideas at work today.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Suffice it to say
that such a </span><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">confused system,</i><span style="mso-bidi-font-style: italic;"> which combines the "forced
change" aspect of </span><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">equalization</i><span style="mso-bidi-font-style: italic;"> and </span><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">social democracy</i><span style="mso-bidi-font-style: italic;"> with the
"preservation of the status quo" aspect of conservative socialism, is
</span><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">not</i><span style="mso-bidi-font-style: italic;"> laissez-faire capitalism.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The
fact that the actual state of affairs consists of a </span><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">confused and contradictory mixture of ideas</i><span style="mso-bidi-font-style: italic;"> is unsurprising since such mixtures have been the hallmark of
socialism for some time now.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Mises
notes this tendency toward mixing contradictory policies when he writes that</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<span style="mso-bidi-font-style: italic;">the social and economic teachings of the self-styled "un-orthodox
Progressives" are a garbled mixture of divers particles of heterogeneous
doctrines incompatible with one another.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>The main components of this body of opinion were taken from Marxism,
British Fabianism, and the Prussian Historical School.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Essential elements were also borrowed from
the teachings of those monetary reformers, inflationists who were long known
only as "monetary cranks."<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>And the legacy of Mercantilism is important too.<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xliii]</span></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>Addressing the Author's Attack on Competition:</u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The author portrays his world government solution for the
global warming crisis as the "cooperative" solution supposedly in
order to make the situation appear as a choice between his
"cooperative" solution and the non-cooperative "competitive"
solution of capitalism.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>He
specifically writes that "when international cooperation was never more
desperately needed, capitalism promoted competition as the predominant form of
human relations."<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The author's way
of framing the entire debate is a classic example of the hypostatization of
"society" fallacy, which invariably leads to the assertion that the
interests of the supposedly cooperating collective outweigh those of the
supposedly atomistic individuals.<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xliv]</span></span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Moreover, it is a contradiction in terms to
call a world government a <i>cooperative </i>solution because every government,
by definition, is a <i>coercive</i> solution.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>As Mises so eloquently put it, "the essential feature of government
is the enforcement of its decrees by beating, killing, and imprisoning.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Those who are asking for more government
interference are asking ultimately for more compulsion and less freedom."<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xlv]</span></span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Even though the author has committed the epistemological
fallacy of hypostatization, has erroneously rejected methodological individualism,
and has advanced tyranny in the name of a cooperative solution, I still feel
that the author's multiple attacks on <i>competition</i> warrant a full and
detailed rebuttal.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The author attacks
competition by making such accusations as follows:<br style="mso-special-character: line-break;" />
<br style="mso-special-character: line-break;" />
</div>
<ul style="margin-top: 0in;" type="disc">
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l4 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in;">Competition
causes waste and consumption</li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l4 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in;">Competition
causes an "obscene accumulation of wealth by a ruthless
minority" (i.e., competition causes wealth concentration)</li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l4 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in;">Competition
causes all these horrible outcomes including impoverishment of half the
world's population (i.e., competition causes poverty)</li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l4 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in;">Competition
deprives the poor from access to food, shelter, education, and health care</li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l4 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in;">Competition
causes war and "other conflicts" (presumably the author means
imperialism?)</li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l4 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in;">Competition
is meant to finance war profiteering</li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l4 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in;">Competition
causes our current "national security" problems (presumably the
author is trying to imply that things such as the <i>Patriot Act</i> and
invasive <i>TSA </i>scanners are symptoms of competition run amuck?)</li>
</ul>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The author's prolonged attack on competition can only make
sense if humans live in a world of scarcity.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>If we were to live in a world of superabundance with no scarcity then
there would be no reason for people to compete over access to resources.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In the next section of my paper, I will
discuss the author's contradictory claim that our entire economic system is
based on "limitless" natural resources that can be
"endlessly" exploited, i.e., our entire economic system is based on
superabundance and not scarcity.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The
author has created an imaginary figure called a "capitalist" who
simultaneously holds contradictory views.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>In this section, the "capitalist" engages in competition; the
"capitalist" is therefore assuming that scarcity <i>exists.</i><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>However, in the next section, this same
"capitalist" operates in a world of "limitless" and
"endless" exploitation of resources, i.e., a world <i>without</i>
scarcity, a world <i>without </i>competition.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>So, if this section is correct, i.e., if the "capitalist" is
really engaging in competition, then the next section must necessarily be
false.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Similarly, if the next section
is correct, i.e., if the "capitalist" is really living in a
superabundant world <i>without</i> competition, then this section must
necessarily be false.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Whichever way one
looks at the situation, the author has refuted himself.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The world cannot be simultaneously
competitive and non-competitive, nor can it be simultaneously an example of
scarcity and no scarcity.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>A capitalist
will never permit himself to be simultaneously engaged in rigorous competition
if he also believes that resources are endlessly exploitable.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In order to reply to the author, I will try
to play along with him and assume, in this section, that scarcity <i>does </i>exist;
consequently, I assume for the moment that people are engaged in competition
over scarce resources.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In a world of scarcity, all the objections raised by the
author are, in fact, immaterial; the author misses the point.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The reason is that <i>in a world of
scarcity, it is IMPOSSIBLE TO ELIMINATE COMPETITION.</i><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>As Ludwig von Mises points out in one of his
shorter works, that humans, because they <i>act</i>, i.e., because they strive
to substitute a better state of affairs for a less satisfactory one, <i>must</i>
be engaged in <i>continuous competition</i>:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
Competition can <i>never be
eliminated </i>[emphasis added]. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>As
there will always be positions which men value more highly than other
positions, people will strive for them and try to outstrip their rivals.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It is immaterial whether we call this
emulation rivalry or competition. ... The question is only <i>what kind of
competition should exist</i> [emphasis added].<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xlvi]</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In fact, one of the author's proposed solutions would
actually <i>intensify</i> not reduce competition.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>By writing that his plan "entails curbing economic
growth," the author <i>wants to intensify the scarcity problem</i> by
restricting the amount of available goods and services and by limiting the
number of opportunities for labor and capital.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>This enhanced scarcity problem implies, of course, that the intensity of
competition will <i>increase, </i>not decrease, thus undermining the author's
claim that he is fighting against the pernicious outcomes of competition.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>If the author were being consistent, i.e.,
if the author really wanted to solve the competition "problem," he
would recommend making <i>more goods available</i> in order to bring mankind
closer to the utopia state of superabundance, at least superabundance of
material goods and services.<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xlvii]</span></span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The reality of the situation, as illustrated by economic
history, is as follows.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Scarcity
exists; competition therefore also exists.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Since many capitalists do not like competition, <i>a recurring theme in
economic history is that of deliberately suppressing competition.</i><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Consider as an illustrative example the
discussion of Benjamin Tucker on what he calls the "money
monopoly."<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I have deliberately
picked the history of banking in order to illustrate that our
"progressive" author is either intentionally or more likely
unintentionally advocating for a position that <i>favors the big banks</i>--surely
a rather strange position for a progressive writer to take!<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In Tucker's discussion of the "most
evil" of the monopolies, he singles out the money monopoly for his
harshest opprobrium.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The reason why is
that the government grants <i>privileges </i>to favored producers in order to <i>suppress
competition</i> from rival firms; such <i>suppression of competition</i> is
obviously being done to <i>protect the privileged</i> from the rivalry of the
unprivileged.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Tucker writes that</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
in the importance of its evil
influence they [i.e., Pierre-Joseph Proudhon and Josiah Warren] considered the
money monopoly, which consists of the <i>privilege given by the government to
certain individuals</i> [emphasis added], or to individuals holding certain
kinds of property, of issuing the circulating medium, a privilege which is now
enforced in this country [i.e., America; Tucker published in Massachusetts] by <i>a
national tax of ten per cent., upon all other persons who attempt to furnish a
circulating medium</i> [emphasis added], and by State laws making it a criminal
offense to issue notes as currency.<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xlviii]</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In the preceding quotation, Tucker is probably alluding to
the banking reforms brought in during the Lincoln administration.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In his attack on the Hamiltonian inspired
"American System," Thomas DiLorenzo focuses his attention on the
privileges given to the favored "national banks" at the expense of
the unprivileged "state banks."<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>DiLorenzo writes that</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
they [i.e., the Republicans] passed
the National Currency Acts of 1863 and 1864, which created a system of <i>nationally</i>
chartered (and regulated) banks that could issue currency.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><i>A punitive 10 percent tax was placed on
state-chartered banks in order to drive them into bankruptcy</i> [emphasis
added].<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The neo-Hamiltonians were
candid about their intention to create an "unqualified government
monopoly..."<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xlix]</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The deliberate and discriminatory suppression of competition
by certain politically connected big banks at the expense of all other banks,
i.e., at the expense of their competitors, is, in fact, one of the common
denominators running throughout the history of banking.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>As a further and later example, consider
also the history of the creation of the Federal Reserve System in the United
States; this history reveals that one of the major reasons for establishing a
central bank was to <i>deliberately suppress competition.</i><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>As Gabriel Kolko observes in his
reinterpretation of the history of the Progressive Era, the machinations of the
bankers trying to establish a central bank contain many references to
competition suppression and specifically to the suppression of state-bank competition.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Kolko, in reviewing a discussion about the
Aldrich Plan, mentions that</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
the participants were fully aware
of <i>the menace of the growing state banking movement </i>[emphasis added],
and referred to it many times. ... It was generally appreciated that the plan
would increase the power of the big national banks to compete with the rapidly
growing state banks, <i>help bring the state banks under control</i> [emphasis
added], and strengthen the position of the national banks in foreign banking
activities.<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[l]</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Why did these big national bankers want to suppress
competition beginning with legislative movements in the Civil War era?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Were they driven by the altruistic
"caring and sharing" motives of the Keynesians?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Were the big bankers suppressing competition
in order to eliminate "waste" and "poverty"?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Were the big bankers deliberately trying to
suppress competition so that they could prevent the wars sparked by unregulated
competition?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Were the big bankers
worried about the "war profiteering" of competition, so they deliberately
set up a central bank in order to suppress it?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Are we to believe that the big bankers, honestly concerned about the
"dangerous wealth concentration" effects of competition, intervened
in the economy in order to suppress competition and thereby to help
redistribute wealth more evenly?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The
author of the article is in a precarious position because on the one hand he
wants to abolish competition, which is favored by the big banks (a rather
non-"progressive" position to take), but on the other hand he wants
to overthrow the rich bankers (a more "progressive" position
perhaps), which is obviously not favored by them.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
What seems to be going on here is that the author is
couching his argument <i>for his seizing of power</i> in terms of
"cooperation" and the suppression of supposedly "bad"
competition.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>History teaches that the
bankers were motivated in the late nineteenth-century and early
twentieth-century to suppress competition in order to <i>establish a single
dominating power over the entire economy.</i><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Kolko mentions this startlingly candid revelation from A. Barton Hepburn
regarding the <i>real intentions for suppressing bank competition:</i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
The measure recognizes and adopts
the principles of a central bank.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Indeed, if it works out as the sponsors of the law hope, it will make
all incorporated banks together joint owners of <i>a central dominating power</i>
[emphasis added].<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Why, then, should not
the principle, once recognized, be correctly applied?<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[li]</span></span>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Suppressing competition is all about establishing a central
dominating power over the economy and hence life itself.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I suspect that the author's real concern is
that he wants to control the power of the state in order to impose what he
thinks is right; unfortunately, power is <i>not</i> in his hands but rather in
those of the bankers and other elites. Consequently, the author has couched his
power grab in terms of cooperation and saving the environment.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>He is trying to put an ethical spin on his
unethical world government proposal.<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[lii]</span></span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Now I will shift away from the more abstract issues of
scarcity and centralizing power by addressing specifically the laundry list of
complaints raised by the author against competition in some detail.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<ul style="margin-top: 0in;" type="disc">
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l5 level1 lfo8; tab-stops: list .5in;">I must
confess that I do not fully understand what the author means when he says
that competition causes "consumption" because consumption is
necessary for humans to stay alive.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>All production happens in order to, eventually, satisfy the
consumption needs of consumers.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Maybe he is alluding to "conspicuous consumption" and
thinks that this "conspicuous consumption" is a form of
"waste."<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Maybe he is
concerned about consumers having choice and changing their minds; choice
and change might then threaten stable unionized jobs because they shift
demand from one group of producers to another. </li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l5 level1 lfo8; tab-stops: list .5in;">With regard
to the claim that competition causes waste, see Ludwig von Mises's <i>Nation,
State, and Economy:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Contributions
to the Politics and History of Our Time</i>, pages 155-157.<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[liii]</span></span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Mises critiques some of Karl Kautsky's
ideas regarding how to raise the standard of living of the proletarian
class substantially.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Mises
specifically addresses Kautsky's laundry list of alleged "savings of
very many kinds," which are to appear when "wasteful"
capitalism is abolished and replaced by "non-wasteful" socialism
(e.g., by eliminating wasteful advertising expenses).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Also see F. A. Hayek, <i>The Road to
Serfdom</i> pages 96-97 where he discusses attempts to increase abundance
by establishing "compulsory standardization" and
"prohibition of variety" as possible ways to reduce the
"waste" of "choice."<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[liv]</span></span></li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l5 level1 lfo8; tab-stops: list .5in;">With
regard to the claim that competition causes wealth concentration, see
Ludwig M. Lachmann's article <i>The Market and the Distribution of Wealth,</i>
in which he discusses how a truly free market creates such a dynamic
environment that wealth concentration becomes an <i>impossibility.</i><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>He emphasizes that "in a world of
unexpected change the maintenance of wealth is always problematical; and
in the long run it may be said to be impossible."<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[lv]</span></span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>For a further discussion of the
problems in this rather Marxist assertion that competition causes wealth
concentration, see Murray N. Rothbard's discussion on <i>the concentration
of capital</i> and on the <i>law of the centralization of capital</i> in
his <i>Classical Economics.</i><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Rothbard concedes that "there is a great amount of expansion
of scale of plant and firm in the modern world," but cautions that
"the law is scarcely apodictic [i.e., the law is <i>not</i>
unquestionably true]."<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[lvi]</span></span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In addition, consider Robert LeFevre's
audio commentary on the impact of the Industrial Revolution in Great
Britain on the distribution of wealth.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>He compares the distribution of wealth before the Industrial
Revolution (1650-1700) to the distribution after the Industrial Revolution
(1850).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><br />
<br />
In the 1650 to 1700 (i.e., before the rapid industrialization):</li>
<ul style="margin-top: 0in;" type="circle">
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l5 level2 lfo8; tab-stops: list 1.0in;">2%
of the people had 80% of the wealth</li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l5 level2 lfo8; tab-stops: list 1.0in;">8%
of the people had 10% of the wealth</li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l5 level2 lfo8; tab-stops: list 1.0in;">90%
of the people had 10% of the wealth</li>
</ul>
</ul>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
Around 1850 (i.e., after the rapid
industrialization):</div>
<ul style="margin-top: 0in;" type="disc"><ul style="margin-top: 0in;" type="circle">
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l5 level2 lfo8; tab-stops: list 1.0in;">2%
of the people had 30% of the wealth</li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l5 level2 lfo8; tab-stops: list 1.0in;">58%
of the people had 50% of the wealth</li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l5 level2 lfo8; tab-stops: list 1.0in;">40%
of the people had 20% of the wealth</li>
</ul>
</ul>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
LeFevre stresses that <i>everyone</i>
is better off because of the rapid industrialization period (i.e., because of
capitalism), including the top 2%, even thought their percentage share of the
total wealth was reduced from 80% to 30%.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>The reason is because the total amount of wealth in existence expanded
so much that it is better to have 30% of the wealth in 1850 than to have 80% of
the wealth in 1650 or 1700.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The middle
class has rapidly grown in size going from 8% of the population to 58%; the
lower classes have shrunk from 90% of the population to 40% and have become
better off since a larger percentage of the total wealth is now available to
the lower classes.<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[lvii]</span></span></div>
<ul style="margin-top: 0in;" type="disc">
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l5 level1 lfo8; tab-stops: list .5in;">With
regard to the claim that competition causes pain and suffering to the
poor, see W. H. Hutt's paper <i>The Factory System of the Early Nineteenth
Century</i>, which contains a thesis that states that "there has been
a general tendency to exaggerate the 'evils' which characterized the
factory system before the abandonment of laissez faire."<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[lviii]</span></span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Also see Murray N. Rothbard's <i>The
Ethics of Liberty, </i>which contains a discussion about how the poor <i>benefit
from economic competition.</i><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Rothbard's point is that "unrestrained economic individualism
led... to peaceful and harmonious exchange, which benefitted most
precisely the 'weak' and the 'sheep'; it is the latter who could <i>not</i>
survive in the statist rule of the jungle, who reap the largest share of
the benefits from the freely competitive society."<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[lix]</span></span></li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l5 level1 lfo8; tab-stops: list .5in;">With
regard to the claim that competition causes profitable wars and other
forms of conflict, see again Mises's <i>Nation, State, and Economy:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Contributions to the Politics and
History of Our Time,</i> pages 148-9, especially footnote 2.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Mises mentions that socialism is
inherently militaristic and imperialistic.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This is because socialism wants to "arrange the future
state on the model of an army."<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Also see Rothbard's discussion of the rise of American imperialism
and especially the machinations of Charles Conant in Rothbard's <i>The Origins
of the Federal Reserve.</i><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In
particular, imperialism was supported, at least intellectually, by a <i>theory
of surplus capital;</i> however, the facts of history refute the
theory.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>"The <i>Republican</i>
also attacked the new theory of surplus capital, pointing out that only
two or three years earlier, businessmen had been loudly calling for <i>more
</i>[emphasis added] European capital to be invested in American
ventures."<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[lx]</span></span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>For a discussion on why competition
does <i>not </i>lead to conflict but rather to a harmonious alignment of <i>all</i>
interests, see Ludwig von Mises's <i>Economics as a Bridge for Interhuman
Understanding,</i> where Mises discusses the difference between the
Montaigne fallacy (i.e., the fallacy behind mercantilism) and the harmony
of interests doctrine of classical liberalism, which Mises refers to as
the "law of association."<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[lxi]</span></span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>For a discussion on the <i>monetary
cause of war,</i> see Murray N. Rothbard's <i>Making Economic Sense </i>(2nd
ed.)<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Rothbard identifies the
monetarist-Friedmanite version of an international monetary order as a <i>causal
factor</i> of World War II.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Rothbard explains how monetary policy manipulations <i>cause
warfare</i> by observing that the monetarist system offers governments
temptations to "intervene heavily in exchange rates, precipitating
the world into currency blocs, protectionist blocs, and
'beggar-my-neighbor' policies of competing currency devaluations <i>such
as the economic warfare of the 1930s that helped generate World War II</i>
[emphasis added]."<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[lxii]</span></span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In discussing the fluctuating fiat
currency system that existed from 1931 to 1945, Rothbard discusses why
this system is internally self-refuting because it contains the naive
assumption that a government and central bank with complete power over a
money supply will self-regulate and avoid abusing that power.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>"The chaos and the unbridled
economic warfare of the 1930s," writes Rothbard, "points up an
important lesson:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>the grievous <i>political</i>
flaw...in the Milton Friedman-Chicago School monetary scheme."<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The scheme leaves "the absolute
control of each national currency in the hands of its central government
issuing fiat paper as legal tender--<i>and then </i>advise[s] each
government to allow its currency to fluctuate freely with respect to all
other fiat currencies, as well as to refrain from inflating its currency
too outrageously."<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[lxiii]</span></span></li>
</ul>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In conclusion, each and every specific point raised against
competition by the author of the article is wrong.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Competition does <i>not </i>cause waste; on the contrary, the
rational economic calculation crisis of the author's proposed world government
will cause so much waste because of the misallocation of all of the factors of
production.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Competition does <i>not </i>cause
a wealth concentration problem.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>On the
contrary, competition will make the world much more dynamic, and a dynamic
world ensures that holding onto wealth will become impossible.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Competition does <i>not</i> cause poverty;
in fact, the system of competition, namely capitalism, makes <i>everybody</i>
better off materially as illustrated statistically by LeFevre.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Competition does <i>not </i>cause wars.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Wars are caused by governments manipulating
currencies in order for some governments to gain at the expense of other
governments, i.e., wars are caused by governments falling into the Montaigne
fallacy.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Competition cannot be
eliminated so long as humans <i>act.</i><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>To eliminate competition through the establishment of a world government
means that only this world government <i>acts.</i><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Each individual will be denied the right to <i>act, </i>but to
deny the individual the right to act means that the individual can only obey
orders.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The solution offered by the
author is, in the final analysis, blatantly tyrannical.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Finally, competition does <i>not </i>really
exist in our current world, so the author's fears of competition are
unwarranted.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Economic history, from the
Civil War Era to the present, shows an ongoing and deliberate war against
competition, which has been supported nonstop by states.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The banking industry is the most important
illustration of this fact.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The money
monopoly, to use Tucker's terminology, <i>is the key command post of the entire
economy.</i><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[lxiv]</span></span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This key central command post is <i>clearly
not competitive because it is a monopoly,</i> and it is not competitive <i>by
deliberate design.</i><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>The Bizarre Claim that Capitalism is based on an
Assumption of "Limitless Growth/Limitless Resources":</u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In the preceding section, the author claims that capitalism
is evil because capitalists engage in destructive and ruinous competition.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>For this argument to hold, capitalists must
be assuming the existence of <i>scarcity, </i>because people compete <i>only</i>
when access to resources is limited.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>However, in this section, the author makes the <i>opposite case.</i><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Now, the author asserts, capitalists <i>deny
the existence of scarcity</i> as demonstrated by the fact that capitalists now
supposedly operate under the assumption of "limitless growth" or
"endless exploitation" of resources.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>The author cannot have it both ways.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Either scarcity exists or it does not.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>If it does, then competition exists and this entire section is
spurious.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>If, on the other hand,
scarcity does <i>not </i>exist, then the previous section on competition is
spurious.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I have already demonstrated
that the previous section against competition is spurious; I will now
demonstrate that the current section on "capitalist superabundance"
is also spurious.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In this section, the reader is forced to assume that
capitalism operates under an assumption that scarcity does <i>not exist.</i><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The author makes this point by saying such
things as:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<ul style="margin-top: 0in;" type="disc">
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l2 level1 lfo4; tab-stops: list .5in;">the
central fiction on which our economic model [i.e., the modern rapacious
capitalist model] is based:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>that
nature is <i>limitless</i> [emphasis added] (i.e., modern capitalism
assumes that natural resources, factors of production, are limitless)</li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l2 level1 lfo4; tab-stops: list .5in;">the
fatally flawed assumption of capitalism is "that we will <i>always be
able to find more </i>[emphasis added] of what we need" (i.e.,
capitalists assume superabundance of all factors of production)</li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l2 level1 lfo4; tab-stops: list .5in;">if
something runs out it can be seamlessly replaced by another resource that
we can <i>endlessly exploit</i> [emphasis added]</li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l2 level1 lfo4; tab-stops: list .5in;">its
irresponsible reliance on <i>infinite economic growth</i> [emphasis added]
on a finite planet</li>
</ul>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The author has linked capitalism with a world of
superabundance, i.e., a world <i>without</i> scarcity.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This entire train of thought is <i>rather
shocking</i> given the history of socialist claims with regard to the scarcity
of resources issue.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>As will be
demonstrated, socialism has traditionally claimed that it will save humanity
from the "artificial" scarcity problem created by evil capitalists.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Normally, the propaganda asserts that
capitalism means scarcity or artificially engineered scarcity but socialism
means superabundance and bliss.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>A quick
review of the literature demonstrates that the socialist position has
traditionally been:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 57.0pt; mso-list: l1 level1 lfo11; tab-stops: list 57.0pt; text-indent: -.25in;">
<span style="font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";">
</span></span>Socialism was to create the world of plenty; the
scarcity problem was to be abolished</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 57.0pt; mso-list: l1 level1 lfo11; tab-stops: list 57.0pt; text-indent: -.25in;">
<span style="font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";">
</span></span>Once the proletarians had abolished private property
and capitalism, communist industrial production was to take over and grow
output at a very rapid rate </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Hayek, in discussing his 1944 situation in Europe, paints a
picture of a world in which <i>socialism was speaking of limitless resources, </i>not
the other way around:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
In their wishful belief that there
is really no longer an economic problem people have been confirmed by
irresponsible talk about "potential plenty"--which, if it were a
fact, would indeed mean that there is no economic problem which makes the
choice inevitable.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>But although <i>this
snare has served socialist propaganda under various names as long as socialism
has existed,</i> [emphasis added] it is still as palpably untrue as it was when
it was first used over a hundred years ago.<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[lxv]</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Continuing with the issue of rapid and "infinite
growth," a look at the writing of Friedrich Engels, <i>The Principles of
Communism,</i> shows that <i>communism</i> desires to create such a rampant
rate of industrial growth that superabundance would be achieved.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Rothbard, citing Engel's views on how
communism can achieve superabundance, writes that</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
private property can be abolished
only when the economy is capable of producing the volume of goods needed to
satisfy everyone's requirements... <i>The new rate of industrial growth will
produce enough goods to satisfy all the demands of society</i> [emphasis
added].<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[lxvi]</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Socialism proposes to abolish the economic problem of
scarcity, and socialism proposes to grow industrial output at a rapid rate thus
creating the world of plenty.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>These
claims, of course, are meant to position socialism as the salvation of mankind
from the artificial scarcity problem created by the rapacious capitalists.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In fact, two of the major non-economic
theories used to explain from where scarcity came blame capitalism.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The traditional Marxian view labels scarcity
as a "historical category," which will be abolished by ending private
property, i.e., by abolishing capitalism.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>A second view blames scarcity on the machinations of bankers and other
exploiters (i.e., on capitalists once again), but this time the capitalists
create an artificial scarcity by imposing checks on credit and new money
creation.<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[lxvii]</span></span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Given this historical background, which
clearly blames capitalism for all the scarcity problems of the world, one
certainly should be shocked by the author's claim that capitalism is currently
producing as thought no scarcity exists.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
From a market anarchist perspective, the claim that
capitalists operate under the assumption of "no scarcity" is
ludicrous.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The existence of scarcity is
taken as self-evident:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>"It does
not need much comment to see that there is indeed scarcity of goods, of all
sorts of goods, everywhere, and the need for property rights is thus
evident."<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[lxviii]</span></span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>To deny the existence of scarcity, as
socialists do, is to invite mockery and derision from those familiar with
laissez-faire capitalism.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>For example,
classical liberal writers used to mock socialist writers for <i>their</i> naive
<i>socialist </i>superabundance <i>fairytales.</i><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>As a case in point, Ludwig von Mises, in his 1927 work on liberal
thought, sardonically writes of the views of Trotsky as well as those of other
socialist writers.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Mises writes that</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
socialist authors promise not only
wealth for all, but also happiness in love for everybody, the full physical and
spiritual development of each individual, the unfolding of great artistic and
scientific talents in all men, etc.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Only recently Trotsky stated in one of his writings that in the
socialist society "the average human type will rise to the heights of an
Aristotle, a Goethe, or a Marx.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>And
above this ridge new peaks will rise.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><i>The
socialist paradise will be the kingdom of perfection, populated by completely
happy supermen.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>All socialist
literature is full of such nonsense</i> [emphasis added].<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[lxix]</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In conclusion, capitalists are not utopians; they do <i>not</i>
assume that the world has limitless natural resources, which can be exploited
interminably.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>They accept as
self-evident the claim that scarcity <i>does</i>, in fact, exist.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In fact, market anarchy goes so far as to
assert that it is <i>impossible to eliminate scarcity.</i><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>"Because of the scarcity of body and
time," writes Hoppe, "even in the Garden of Eden property regulations
would have to be established."<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[lxx]</span></span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Since capitalists <i>accept</i> scarcity as
a real and insoluble problem, the author's claims to the contrary must be
rejected as false.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>The Author's Ahistoric Animistic Worldview:</u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The author of the article makes a revealing comment about
his worldview when he writes, "they [the capitalists] quickly
re-established capitalism as the truly ruthless and rapacious system it was <i>designed
to be</i>" [emphasis added].<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The
key point is that the author claims that capitalism was <i>designed</i> by a
conspiracy of capitalists, who continue to plot not only against the vast
number of indigent and helpless human beings, but also against the Earth and
the environment.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>A number of points can
be raised against the author's animistic point of view.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
First, the claim of a conspiracy by design on the part of
capitalists is <i>ahistoric</i>.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The
emergence of capitalism is <i>not</i> an example of conscious design but rather
an example of <i>spontaneous ordering of a complex system;</i> this spontaneous
ordering took place in an anarchistic environment.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Professor T. S. Ashton, a respected economic historian, observes
that </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
the truth is (as Professor Koebner
has said) that neither Marx nor Sombart (nor, for that matter, Adam Smith) had
any idea of the real nature of what we call the Industrial Revolution.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>They overstressed the part played by science
and had no conception of an economic system that <i>develops spontaneously
without the help of either the state or the philosopher</i> [emphasis added].<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[lxxi]</span></span>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The claim that capitalism arose in an anarchistic
environment is further substantiated by Nobel Prize winning economist Friedrich
August von Hayek, referring to Jean Baechler's work on the origins of
capitalism.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Hayek notes that "of
the revival of European civilisation during the later Middle Ages it could be
said that the expansion of capitalism--and European civilisation--owes its
origins and <i>raison d'être </i>to political anarchy."<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[lxxii]</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Second, Hayek's discussion of the two different <i>types</i>
of scientists provides a possible explanation for why the author of the article
selects an animistic worldview.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Hayek
distinguishes between the "chemist" type of scientist who is familiar
with complex phenomena and the "other" type of scientist who is
not.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The "other" type of
scientist is more "accustomed to explaining everything in terms of simple
connections between a few observable events."<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[lxxiii]</span></span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The author of the article might very well be
classified as a member of the "other" type of scientist group.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The reason is that members of this
"other" group are "tempted to interpret more complex structures
[such as an economy] animistically as the result of design, and to suspect some
secret and dishonest manipulation--some conspiracy, as of a dominant
'class'--behind 'designs' whose designers are nowhere to be found."<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[lxxiv]</span></span>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Third, the author of the article may have selected an
animistic worldview simply because he is a socialist.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Such a "naive and childlike animistic view of the
world," writes F. A. Hayek, "has come to dominate social theory and
is the foundation of socialist thought."<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[lxxv]</span></span>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In conclusion, a complex capitalist economic system is the
product of an <i>spontaneous ordering</i>, i.e., a complex ordering <i>without
design.</i><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>What the author of the
article is actually observing is not capitalism but rather the "planned
chaos" of government interventionism.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>The Logical Inconsistencies When Claiming to Take the
Moral High Ground:</u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The author ends his paper with various hyperbolic
"moral high ground" or "global salvation type"
exclamations:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<ul style="margin-top: 0in;" type="disc">
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l6 level1 lfo5; tab-stops: list .5in;">It's
also going to be difficult, at least initially to engage...in this <i>titanic
endeavour </i>[emphasis added]</li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l6 level1 lfo5; tab-stops: list .5in;">to
stand idly by while runaway capitalism carries everyone with <i>it to the
abyss</i> [emphasis added]--surely that will not be the <i>conscious
decision</i> [emphasis added] most of us make</li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l6 level1 lfo5; tab-stops: list .5in;">I
can't believe we will be so cowed by them that we remain passive onlookers
<i>instead of striving, as strenuously as we can,</i> [emphasis added] to
avert disaster on a planetary scale</li>
</ul>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
To begin, the claim that socialism is the means to salvation
is rather shocking, at least to somebody who knows its early history.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>As F. A. Hayek notes, socialism, in its
early days, was unashamedly totalitarian in its views:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
It is rarely remembered now that
socialism in its beginnings was frankly authoritarian.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The French writers who laid the foundations
of modern socialism had no doubt that their ideas could be put into practice
only by a strong dictatorial government.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>To them socialism meant an attempt to "terminate the
revolution" [i.e., to terminate the liberalism of the French Revolution]
by a deliberate reorganization of society on hierarchical lines and by the
imposition of a coercive "spiritual power."<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[lxxvi]</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The author claims that his proposals will bring salvation to
humanity, and he energetically rallies his readers to join his
"crusade" against the capitalist overlords.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The reality is that these "moral high ground" proposals
advocated for by the author will end in a global level tyranny.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Socialism was <i>designed</i> specifically
to bring about a top-down dictatorship; the author's proposal to establish a
world government in the name of fighting global warming will certainly
facilitate the longstanding socialist plan dating to the French Revolution.<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[lxxvii]</span></span><br />
<br />
The last criticism that I will make of the author's article is simply that the
conclusion contradicts the introduction.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>He begins the article with statements of <i>inevitability;</i> not
surprisingly, he begins his article with the unsubstantiated prophecy that
capitalism is about to "<i>inevitably" collapse.</i><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Notice for example, the author writes:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<ul style="margin-top: 0in;" type="disc">
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l10 level1 lfo6; tab-stops: list .5in;">Capitalism
<i>inevitably</i> [emphasis added] faces the same fate.</li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l10 level1 lfo6; tab-stops: list .5in;">It is
[Capitalism is] not going to hit the pavement any time soon, but is
obviously on an <i>irreversible downward plunge</i> [emphasis added]</li>
</ul>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But when he reaches the conclusion part of the article, the
author switches gears by adopting a <i>purposeful or teleological view</i> of
the world.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The conclusion section of
the article is obviously calling upon the readers <i>to take</i> <i>deliberate
action.</i><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The author even goes so far
as to spell out a rudimentary <i>plan</i> of the things he wants to see changed
along with the things he wants to see adopted.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The author has fallen into another classic Marxist trap by
first arguing in terms of dialectical materialism, which talks of propelling
society toward socialism "with the inexorability of a law of nature,"
and then by arguing in terms of a teleological world view when he calls for
people to implement deliberately a revolutionary plan of global social
change.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This particular problem is
examined in depth by Ludwig von Mises when he trenchantly observes that </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
the best illustration is provided
by Marxism.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It teaches perfect
foreordination, yet still aims to inflame people with revolutionary
spirit.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>What is the use of
revolutionary action if events must inevitably turn out according to a
preordained plan, whatever men may do?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Why are the Marxians so busy organizing socialist parties and sabotaging
the operation of the market economy if socialism is bound to come anyway
"with the inexorability of a law of nature"?<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[lxxviii]</span></span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>Conclusion:</u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The author of the article begins his paper by claiming that
the world today is a shining example of an "unchecked free enterprise
economy."<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>He then proceeds by
providing evidence to support his initial claim.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>He sees a world of deregulation, free trade agreements, cutthroat
competition, unbridled capitalist greed, a global free market ideology,
capitalistic environmental destruction, and an animistic capitalist conspiracy
to hurt the poor and downtrodden.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>After
highlighting all of these horrible results of capitalism, the author provides a
socialist solution--cooperation through a world government.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>By implementing the proposed solution, the
author believes that he will create a better world consisting of cooperation,
equity, and social justice.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I deny that our current world should be classified as
"unchecked free enterprise" because the existence of the state
ensures that private property will be violated continually.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I argue that the author's interpretation of
twentieth-century economic history is distorted and misleading especially the
claim that Keynesian economics was meant to help the weak and poor in
society.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The description of the current
world as the paragon of free trade is false; the current world is best
described as an example of government-managed trade and mercantilism.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The author levels an intense attack against
competition; I systematically reply in order to defend competition against all
of the author's charges.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I particularly
stress the fact that economic history shows a deliberate trend of competition
suppression starting in the early 1860s.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>I spend a lot of my time pointing out the contradictions in the paper
such as the issue of scarcity and superabundance existing simultaneously, the
conflicting mixture of conservative socialism with social democracy, and the
mixing of Marxian foreordination with deliberate teleological planning.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I also argue that the author's proposed
solution to pool all of the existing governmental resources into a world
government is infeasible.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The author's
proposed solution will not work; it will collapse as demonstrated by the early
Soviet experiment.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: right;">
NEIL M. TOKAR</div>
<div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: right;">
Niagara-on-the-Lake,
Ontario</div>
<div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: right;">
May 29, 2012</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div style="mso-element: endnote-list;">
<br clear="all" />
<hr align="left" size="1" width="33%" />
<div id="edn1" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref1" name="_edn1" style="mso-endnote-id: edn1;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[i]</span></span>
F. A. Hayek, "History and Politics," in <i>Capitalism and the
Historians,</i> ed. F. A. Hayek (Chicago:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>University of Chicago Press, 1963), 25.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span></div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div id="edn2" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref2" name="_edn2" style="mso-endnote-id: edn2;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[ii]</span></span>
Murray N. Rothbard, <i>Classical Economics,</i> vol. 2 of <i>An Austrian
Perspective on the History of Economic Thought</i> (Auburn: Ludwig von Mises
Institute, 2006), 418.</div>
</div>
<div id="edn3" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref3" name="_edn3" style="mso-endnote-id: edn3;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span></div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[iii]</span></span>
Hans-Hermann Hoppe, <i>The Economics and Ethics of Private Property: Studies in
Political Economy and Philosophy,</i> 2nd ed. (Auburn: Ludwig von Mises
Institute, 2006), 378.</div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div id="edn4" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref4" name="_edn4" style="mso-endnote-id: edn4;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[iv]</span></span>
Hans-Hermann Hoppe, <i>A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism</i> (Auburn: Ludwig
von Mises Institute, 2010), 18.</div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div id="edn5" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref5" name="_edn5" style="mso-endnote-id: edn5;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[v]</span></span>
F. A. Hayek, "'Free' Enterprise and Competitive Order," in <i>Individualism
and Economic Order </i>(Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1980), 107.</div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div id="edn6" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref6" name="_edn6" style="mso-endnote-id: edn6;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[vi]</span></span>
F. A. Hayek, "History and Politics," in <i>Capitalism and the
Historians,</i> ed. F. A. Hayek (Chicago:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>University of Chicago Press, 1963), 14-15.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Hayek discusses the socialist origins of the term
"capitalism"; he emphasizes that the "modern connotations"
of capitalism are directly traceable to a socialist interpretation of economic
history.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div id="edn7" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref7" name="_edn7" style="mso-endnote-id: edn7;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[vii]</span></span>
Murray N. Rothbard, <i>Anatomy of the State</i> (Auburn: Ludwig von Mises
Institute, 2009), 42.</div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div id="edn8" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref8" name="_edn8" style="mso-endnote-id: edn8;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[viii]</span></span>
Hans-Hermann Hoppe, <i>Democracy: The God That Failed; The Economics and
Politics of Monarchy, Democracy, and Natural Order</i> (New Brunswick:
Transaction Publishers, 2001), 246.</div>
</div>
<div id="edn9" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref9" name="_edn9" style="mso-endnote-id: edn9;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span></div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[ix]</span></span>
Gabriel Kolko, <i>The Triumph of Conservatism: A Reinterpretation of American
History, 1900-1916</i> (New York: The Free Press, 1977), 4.</div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div id="edn10" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref10" name="_edn10" style="mso-endnote-id: edn10;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[x]</span></span>
Ibid., 13.</div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div id="edn11" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref11" name="_edn11" style="mso-endnote-id: edn11;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xi]</span></span>
Ibid., 4.</div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div id="edn12" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref12" name="_edn12" style="mso-endnote-id: edn12;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xii]</span></span>
Ibid., 55-56.</div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div id="edn13" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref13" name="_edn13" style="mso-endnote-id: edn13;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xiii]</span></span>
Ibid., 39, 42, 78.</div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div id="edn14" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref14" name="_edn14" style="mso-endnote-id: edn14;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xiv]</span></span>
F. A. Hayek, <i>The Road to Serfdom:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Text and Documents,</i> vol. 2 of <i>The Collected Works of F. A. Hayek</i>
(Chicago:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>University of Chicago Press,
2007), 93.</div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div id="edn15" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref15" name="_edn15" style="mso-endnote-id: edn15;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xv]</span></span>
Ludwig von Mises, "Small and Big Business," in <i>Economic Freedom
and Interventionism:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>An Anthology of
Articles and Essays,</i> ed. Bettina Bien Greaves (Indianapolis: Liberty Fund,
2006), 242.</div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div id="edn16" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref16" name="_edn16" style="mso-endnote-id: edn16;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xvi]</span></span>
Murray N. Rothbard, <i>America's Great Depression,</i> 5th ed. (Auburn: Ludwig
von Mises Institute, 2000), 143-44.</div>
</div>
<div id="edn17" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref17" name="_edn17" style="mso-endnote-id: edn17;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span></div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xvii]</span></span>
Murray N. Rothbard, <i>Making Economic Sense</i> (Auburn: Ludwig von Mises
Institute, 1995), 244.</div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div id="edn18" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref18" name="_edn18" style="mso-endnote-id: edn18;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xviii]</span></span>
Gabriel Kolko, <i>The Triumph of Conservatism: A Reinterpretation of American
History, 1900-1916</i> (New York: The Free Press, 1977), 140.</div>
</div>
<div id="edn19" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref19" name="_edn19" style="mso-endnote-id: edn19;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span></div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xix]</span></span>
Murray N. Rothbard, <i>Making Economic Sense</i> (Auburn: Ludwig von Mises
Institute, 1995), 46.</div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div id="edn20" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref20" name="_edn20" style="mso-endnote-id: edn20;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xx]</span></span>
Ibid., 45.</div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div id="edn21" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref21" name="_edn21" style="mso-endnote-id: edn21;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xxi]</span></span>
Ibid., 46.</div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div id="edn22" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref22" name="_edn22" style="mso-endnote-id: edn22;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xxii]</span></span>
Murray N. Rothbard, <i>Wall Street, Banks, and American Foreign Policy,</i> 2nd
ed. (Auburn: Ludwig von Mises Institute, 2011), 1.</div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div id="edn23" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref23" name="_edn23" style="mso-endnote-id: edn23;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xxiii]</span></span>
Ludwig von Mises, "Professor Hutt on Keynesianism," in <i>Economic
Freedom and Interventionism:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>An
Anthology of Articles and Essays,</i> ed. Bettina Bien Greaves (Indianapolis:
Liberty Fund, 2006), 162.</div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div id="edn24" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref24" name="_edn24" style="mso-endnote-id: edn24;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xxiv]</span></span>
Ludwig von Mises, <i>Human Action:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>A
Treatise on Economics,</i> Scholar's ed. (Auburn: Ludwig von Mises Institute,
1998), 787.</div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div id="edn25" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref25" name="_edn25" style="mso-endnote-id: edn25;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xxv]</span></span>
Murray N. Rothbard, <i>Making Economic Sense</i> (Auburn: Ludwig von Mises
Institute, 1995), 42.</div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div id="edn26" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref26" name="_edn26" style="mso-endnote-id: edn26;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xxvi]</span></span>
Ibid., 46.</div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div id="edn27" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref27" name="_edn27" style="mso-endnote-id: edn27;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xxvii]</span></span>
Murray N. Rothbard, <i>Making Economic Sense,</i> 2nd ed. (Auburn: Ludwig von
Mises Institute, 2006), 300.</div>
</div>
<div id="edn28" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref28" name="_edn28" style="mso-endnote-id: edn28;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span></div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xxviii]</span></span>
Benjamin Tucker, "Individual Liberty," The Anarchist Library,
www.theanarchistlibrary.org/ HTML/Benjamin_Tucker_Individual_Liberty.html
(accessed May 11, 2012).</div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div id="edn29" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref29" name="_edn29" style="mso-endnote-id: edn29;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xxix]</span></span>
Murray N. Rothbard, <i>Man, Economy, and State with Power and Market, </i>2nd
ed. Scholar's ed. (Auburn: Ludwig von Mises Institute, 2009), 659.</div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div id="edn30" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref30" name="_edn30" style="mso-endnote-id: edn30;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xxx]</span></span>
F. A. Hayek, "Socialist Calculation I:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>The Nature and History of the Problem," in <i>Individualism and
Economic Order</i> (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1980), 144-45.</div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div id="edn31" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref31" name="_edn31" style="mso-endnote-id: edn31;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xxxi]</span></span>
Murray N. Rothbard, "The Myth of Monolithic Communism," Ludwig von
Mises Institute, mises.org/daily/4492 (accessed May 15, 2012); also
Hans-Hermann Hoppe, <i>A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism</i> (Auburn: Ludwig
von Mises Institute, 2010), 55.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Hoppe
mentions that the disappointing experience of orthodox Marxist socialism in
Russia caused a shift in popularity away from this style of socialism to
social-democratic socialism. </div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div id="edn32" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref32" name="_edn32" style="mso-endnote-id: edn32;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xxxii]</span></span>
"They approve the fundamental thesis of mercantilism that the gain of one
nation is the damage of other nations; that no nation can win but by the loss
of others.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>They think an irreconcilable
conflict of interests prevails among nations."<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Ludwig von Mises, <i>Theory and History: An Interpretation of
Social and Economic Evolution,</i> ed. Bettina Bien Greaves (Indianapolis:
Liberty Fund, 2005), 197.</div>
</div>
<div id="edn33" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref33" name="_edn33" style="mso-endnote-id: edn33;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span></div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xxxiii]</span></span>
Hans-Hermann Hoppe, <i>A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism</i> (Auburn: Ludwig
von Mises Institute, 2010), 84-85.</div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div id="edn34" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref34" name="_edn34" style="mso-endnote-id: edn34;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xxxiv]</span></span>
Ludwig von Mises, <i>Liberalism:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The
Classical Tradition,</i> ed. Bettina Bien Greaves (Indianapolis: Liberty Fund,
2005), 98.</div>
</div>
<div id="edn35" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref35" name="_edn35" style="mso-endnote-id: edn35;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span></div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xxxv]</span></span>
Ron Paul, <i>The Revolution: A Manifesto</i> (New York: Grand Central
Publishing, 2008), 96.</div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div id="edn36" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref36" name="_edn36" style="mso-endnote-id: edn36;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xxxvi]</span></span>
Murray N. Rothbard, <i>Making Economic Sense</i> (Auburn: Ludwig von Mises
Institute, 1995), 271.</div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div id="edn37" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref37" name="_edn37" style="mso-endnote-id: edn37;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xxxvii]</span></span>
Ibid.</div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div id="edn38" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref38" name="_edn38" style="mso-endnote-id: edn38;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xxxviii]</span></span>
Hans-Hermann Hoppe, <i>A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism</i> (Auburn: Ludwig
von Mises Institute, 2010), 59.</div>
</div>
<div id="edn39" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref39" name="_edn39" style="mso-endnote-id: edn39;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span></div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xxxix]</span></span>
Jeffrey Tucker, "Free Trade versus Free-trade Agreements," Mises
Economics Blog, entry posted March 10, 2008,
blog.mises.org/7889/free-trade-versus-free-trade-agreements/ (accessed May 14,
2012).</div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div id="edn40" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref40" name="_edn40" style="mso-endnote-id: edn40;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xl]</span></span>
Ludwig von Mises, <i>Omnipotent Government:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>The Rise of the Total State and Total War,</i> ed. Bettina Bien Greaves
(Indianapolis:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Liberty Fund, 2011),
269, 275.</div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div id="edn41" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref41" name="_edn41" style="mso-endnote-id: edn41;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xli]</span></span>
Llewellyn H. Rockwell Jr., "The WTO:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Threat to Free Trade," Ludwig von Mises Institute,
mises.org/daily/340 (accessed May 14, 2012).</div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div id="edn42" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref42" name="_edn42" style="mso-endnote-id: edn42;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xlii]</span></span>
Hans-Hermann Hoppe, <i>A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism</i> (Auburn: Ludwig
von Mises Institute, 2010), 12-13.</div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div id="edn43" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref43" name="_edn43" style="mso-endnote-id: edn43;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xliii]</span></span>
Ludwig von Mises, "The Objectives of Economic Education," in <i>Economic
Freedom and Interventionism:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>An
Anthology of Articles and Essays,</i> ed. Bettina Bien Greaves (Indianapolis:
Liberty Fund, 2006), 206.</div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div id="edn44" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref44" name="_edn44" style="mso-endnote-id: edn44;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xliv]</span></span>
Ludwig von Mises, <i>The Ultimate Foundation of Economic Science: An Essay on
Method</i>, ed. Bettina Bien Greaves (Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, 2006), 70-71.</div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div id="edn45" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref45" name="_edn45" style="mso-endnote-id: edn45;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xlv]</span></span>
Ludwig von Mises, <i>Human Action:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>A
Treatise on Economics,</i> Scholar's ed. (Auburn: Ludwig von Mises Institute,
1998), 715.</div>
</div>
<div id="edn46" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref46" name="_edn46" style="mso-endnote-id: edn46;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span></div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xlvi]</span></span>
Ludwig von Mises, <i>Bureaucracy,</i> ed. Bettina Bien Greaves (Indianapolis:
Liberty Fund, 2007), 86.</div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div id="edn47" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref47" name="_edn47" style="mso-endnote-id: edn47;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xlvii]</span></span>
It should be noted that it is <i>impossible</i> given the fact that human
beings are mortal to ever fully abolish the scarcity problem.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Even in a utopia consisting of a superabundance
of resources, and even if "socialist production" really did work to
raise production in the manner suggested by Karl Kautsky for example, mankind <i>will
still</i> need to address the scarcity of body and the scarcity of time
problems.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>See Hans-Hermann Hoppe, <i>A
Theory of Socialism and Capitalism</i> (Auburn: Ludwig von Mises Institute,
2010), 18-20.</div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div id="edn48" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref48" name="_edn48" style="mso-endnote-id: edn48;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xlviii]</span></span>
Benjamin Tucker, "Individual Liberty," The Anarchist Library,
www.theanarchistlibrary.org/ HTML/Benjamin_Tucker_Individual_Liberty.html
(accessed May 16, 2012).</div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div id="edn49" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref49" name="_edn49" style="mso-endnote-id: edn49;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[xlix]</span></span>
Thomas J. DiLorenzo, <i>Hamilton's Curse:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>How Jefferson's Archenemy Betrayed the American Revolution--and What It
Means for Americans Today</i> (New York:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Crown Forum, 2008), 127.</div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div id="edn50" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref50" name="_edn50" style="mso-endnote-id: edn50;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[l]</span></span>
Gabriel Kolko, <i>The Triumph of Conservatism: A Reinterpretation of American
History, 1900-1916</i> (New York: The Free Press, 1977), 186.</div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div id="edn51" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref51" name="_edn51" style="mso-endnote-id: edn51;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[li]</span></span>
Ibid., 235.</div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div id="edn52" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref52" name="_edn52" style="mso-endnote-id: edn52;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[lii]</span></span>
"The State is an inherently illegitimate institution of organized
aggression, of organized and regularized crime against the persons and
properties of its subjects." Murray N. Rothbard, <i>The Ethics of Liberty</i>
(New York: New York University Press, 2002), 187.</div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div id="edn53" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref53" name="_edn53" style="mso-endnote-id: edn53;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[liii]</span></span>
Ludwig von Mises, <i>Nation, State, and Economy:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Contributions to the Politics and History of Our Time,</i> ed.
Bettina Bien Greaves, trans. Leland B. Yeager (Indianapolis: Liberty Fund,
2006), 155-57.</div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div id="edn54" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref54" name="_edn54" style="mso-endnote-id: edn54;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[liv]</span></span>
F. A. Hayek, <i>The Road to Serfdom:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Text and Documents,</i> vol. 2 of <i>The Collected Works of F. A. Hayek </i>(Chicago:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>University of Chicago Press, 2007), 97.</div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div id="edn55" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref55" name="_edn55" style="mso-endnote-id: edn55;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[lv]</span></span>
Ludwig M. Lachmann, "The Market and the Distribution of Wealth," Ludwig
von Mises Institute, mises.org/daily/5713 (accessed May 18, 2012).</div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div id="edn56" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref56" name="_edn56" style="mso-endnote-id: edn56;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[lvi]</span></span>
Murray N. Rothbard, <i>Classical Economics,</i> vol. 2 of <i>An Austrian
Perspective on the History of Economic Thought</i> (Auburn: Ludwig von Mises
Institute, 2006), 419-420.</div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div id="edn57" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref57" name="_edn57" style="mso-endnote-id: edn57;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[lvii]</span></span>
Robert LeFevre, "The Industrial Revolution: Part Two," Ludwig von
Mises Institute, mises.org/</div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
media/1161/The-Industrial-Revolution-Part-Two/2
(accessed May 22, 2012).</div>
</div>
<div id="edn58" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref58" name="_edn58" style="mso-endnote-id: edn58;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span></div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[lviii]</span></span>
W. H. Hutt, "The Factory System of the Early Nineteenth Century," in <i>Capitalism
and the Historians,</i> ed. F. A. Hayek (Chicago:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>University of Chicago Press, 1963), 184.</div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div id="edn59" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref59" name="_edn59" style="mso-endnote-id: edn59;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[lix]</span></span>
Murray N. Rothbard, <i>The Ethics of Liberty</i> (New York: New York University
Press, 2002), 218.</div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div id="edn60" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref60" name="_edn60" style="mso-endnote-id: edn60;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[lx]</span></span>
Murray N. Rothbard, <i>The Origins of the Federal Reserve</i> (Auburn: Ludwig
von Mises Institute, 2009), 46.</div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div id="edn61" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref61" name="_edn61" style="mso-endnote-id: edn61;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[lxi]</span></span>
Ludwig von Mises, "Economics as a Bridge for Interhuman
Understanding," in <i>Economic Freedom and Interventionism:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>An Anthology of Articles and Essays,</i> ed.
Bettina Bien Greaves (Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, 2006), 260.</div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div id="edn62" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref62" name="_edn62" style="mso-endnote-id: edn62;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[lxii]</span></span>
Murray N. Rothbard, <i>Making Economic Sense,</i> 2nd ed. (Auburn: Ludwig von
Mises Institute, 2006), 300.</div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div id="edn63" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref63" name="_edn63" style="mso-endnote-id: edn63;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[lxiii]</span></span>
Murray N. Rothbard, <i>What Has Government Done to Our Money? </i>(Auburn:
Ludwig von Mises Institute, 2008), 94.</div>
</div>
<div id="edn64" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref64" name="_edn64" style="mso-endnote-id: edn64;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span></div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[lxiv]</span></span>
Murray N. Rothbard, <i>Anatomy of the State</i> (Auburn: Ludwig von Mises
Institute, 2009), 54n.</div>
</div>
<div id="edn65" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref65" name="_edn65" style="mso-endnote-id: edn65;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span></div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[lxv]</span></span>
F. A. Hayek, <i>The Road to Serfdom:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Text and Documents,</i> vol. 2 of <i>The Collected Works of F. A. Hayek</i>
(Chicago:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>University of Chicago Press,
2007), 131.</div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div id="edn66" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref66" name="_edn66" style="mso-endnote-id: edn66;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[lxvi]</span></span>
Murray N. Rothbard, <i>Classical Economics,</i> vol. 2 of <i>An Austrian
Perspective on the History of Economic Thought</i> (Auburn: Ludwig von Mises
Institute, 2006), 327.</div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div id="edn67" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref67" name="_edn67" style="mso-endnote-id: edn67;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[lxvii]</span></span>
Ludwig von Mises, <i>Human Action:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>A
Treatise on Economics,</i> Scholar's ed. (Auburn: Ludwig von Mises Institute,
1998), 236.</div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div id="edn68" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref68" name="_edn68" style="mso-endnote-id: edn68;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[lxviii]</span></span>
Hans-Hermann Hoppe, <i>A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism</i> (Auburn: Ludwig
von Mises Institute, 2010), 18-19.</div>
</div>
<div id="edn69" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref69" name="_edn69" style="mso-endnote-id: edn69;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span></div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[lxix]</span></span>
Ludwig von Mises, introduction to <i>Liberalism:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The Classical Tradition,</i> ed. Bettina Bien Greaves
(Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, 2005), xxxi.</div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div id="edn70" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref70" name="_edn70" style="mso-endnote-id: edn70;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[lxx]</span></span>
Hans-Hermann Hoppe, <i>A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism</i> (Auburn: Ludwig
von Mises Institute, 2010), 20.</div>
</div>
<div id="edn71" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[lxxi]</span></span>
T. S. Ashton, "The Treatment of Capitalism by Historians," in <i>Capitalism
and the Historians,</i> ed. F. A. Hayek (Chicago:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>University of Chicago Press, 1963), 58.</div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div id="edn72" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref72" name="_edn72" style="mso-endnote-id: edn72;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[lxxii]</span></span>
F. A. Hayek, <i>The Fatal Conceit:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The
Errors of Socialism,</i> vol. 1 of <i>The Collected Works of F. A. Hayek</i>
(Chicago:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>University of Chicago Press,
1991), 33.</div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div id="edn73" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref73" name="_edn73" style="mso-endnote-id: edn73;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[lxxiii]</span></span>
Ibid., 82.</div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div id="edn74" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref74" name="_edn74" style="mso-endnote-id: edn74;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[lxxiv]</span></span>
Ibid.</div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div id="edn75" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref75" name="_edn75" style="mso-endnote-id: edn75;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[lxxv]</span></span>
Ibid., 47.</div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div id="edn76" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref76" name="_edn76" style="mso-endnote-id: edn76;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[lxxvi]</span></span>
F. A. Hayek, <i>The Road to Serfdom:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Text and Documents,</i> vol. 2 of <i>The Collected Works of F. A. Hayek</i>
(Chicago:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>University of Chicago Press,
2007), 76.</div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
<div id="edn77" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref77" name="_edn77" style="mso-endnote-id: edn77;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[lxxvii]</span></span>
David Gordon, ed., <i>Strictly Confidential: The Private Volker Fund Memos of
Murray N. Rothbard</i> (Auburn: Ludwig von Mises Institute, 2010), 28.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The reason for mentioning this work is to
address a possible objection that could be raised against Hayek's assertion
that socialism is unequivocally tyranny.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>In this particular memo, Rothbard addresses the feasibility of
establishing left-wing anarchism, which takes the form of syndicalism in
practice.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Could socialism escape the
Hayekian charge of tyranny by appealing to left-wing anarchism as the escape
hatch?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Rothbard argues that left-wing
anarchism will quickly degrade back into statism, which is synonymous with
tyranny.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>He writes that "left-wing
anarchism must in practice signify either regular Communism or a true chaos of
communistic syndics.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In both cases, the
actual result must be <i>that the State is reestablished under another name.</i><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It is the tragic irony of left-wing
anarchism that, despite the hopes of its supporters, it is not really anarchism
at all.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It is either Communism or
chaos."<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></div>
</div>
<div id="edn78" style="mso-element: endnote;">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6741330243979105436#_ednref78" name="_edn78" style="mso-endnote-id: edn78;" title=""></a><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span></div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="mso-special-character: footnote;">[lxxviii]</span></span>
Ludwig von Mises, <i>Theory and History: An Interpretation of Social and
Economic Evolution,</i> ed. Bettina Bien Greaves (Indianapolis: Liberty Fund,
2005), 54.</div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</div>
</div>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14408794074799022329noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6741330243979105436.post-87326010655613756642012-06-15T00:32:00.002-04:002012-06-15T00:32:13.073-04:00Briefly Covering Austrian versus Mainstream MacroeconomicsThis is a lengthy, but important, quotation from Roger W. Garrison's book <i>Time and Money: The Macroeconomics of Capital Structure.</i> Professor Garrison succinctly distinguishes Austrian economics from mainstream macroeconomics. All emphasis is mine.<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Adopting a means-ends framework for macroeconomic theorizing is a way of emphasizing <b><i>the critical time dimension</i></b>--the time that elapses between the employment of means and the achievement of ends. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
In a modern, decentralized, capital-intensive economy, the original means and the ultimate ends are linked by <i><b>the myriad decisions of intervening entrepreneurs. </b></i> As the market process moves forward, each entrepreneur is guided by circumstances created by the past decisions of all entrepreneurs and by expectations about the future decisions of consumers and of other entrepreneurs. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i><b>These are the decisions</b></i> associated with what Ludwig Lachmann has called <i><b>a network of plans. </b></i></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<b><u><i>The concretization of these plans gives rise to a capital structure, </i></u></b> which we will call--to emphasize the <i><b>time dimension</b></i>--<b><i><u>the intertemporal structure of capital. </u></i></b></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Austrian macroeconomics, then, concerns itself with two critical aspects of economic reality: <i><u><b>the intertemporal capital structure and entrepreneurial expectations.</b></u></i> Mainstream macroeconomics has long ignored the first-mentioned aspect but has become keenly attentive--almost obsessively attentive--to the second.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
On my [i.e., Garrison's] interpretation, Lachmann's writings argue for a better balance of attention and suggest that the <i><b>mainstream's overemphasis of expectations</b></i> is directly related to its <i><b>underemphasis of capital structure.</b></i></blockquote>
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh59O9mQNt4S9Y_HvzK4BGTkL1MSPe2WYT962AXNO0v3u0j7EhmAZHQviFYU6-QnIqaF-EZuDEr6j-2apANa4CxPtxg3sUyIxJadvN3A7gzAdkYq8PzutOaVstxtEP_F7frXPVzb3QSkLuo/s1600/Time+and+Money+Covering+Page+from+the+Mises+Store.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh59O9mQNt4S9Y_HvzK4BGTkL1MSPe2WYT962AXNO0v3u0j7EhmAZHQviFYU6-QnIqaF-EZuDEr6j-2apANa4CxPtxg3sUyIxJadvN3A7gzAdkYq8PzutOaVstxtEP_F7frXPVzb3QSkLuo/s1600/Time+and+Money+Covering+Page+from+the+Mises+Store.jpg" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<br />Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14408794074799022329noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6741330243979105436.post-49317612724558961772012-06-14T17:16:00.003-04:002012-06-14T17:23:46.155-04:00How Not to Defend Private Property: A Critique of the Frontier Centre's Views<br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<b><u><span style="font-size: 16pt;">How Not to Defend Private
Property</span></u></b></div>
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<b><u><span style="font-size: 16pt;"><br /></span></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>Introduction:</u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The purpose of this paper is to critically analyze an
article written by the <i>Frontier Centre,</i> an independent Western Canadian
public policy think tank, from a market anarchist perspective in order to challenge
its claim that it has defended private property rights in Alberta. The article to be analyzed is called <i>Property
Report Should Generate Wider Property Debate,</i> dated March 23, 2012.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The link to the article is as follows: <a href="http://www.fcpp.org/publication.php/4137">http://www.fcpp.org/publication.php/4137</a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
To briefly summarize the <i>Frontier Centre's </i>article,
the government of Alberta engages in some relatively large public consultations
regarding land expropriation as a reaction to the concerns raised by some
Albertans over their fears of arbitrary and unjustified private property
expropriations by that government. The <i>Frontier
Centre</i> downplays the threat to private property throughout the article, and
it even go so far as to explicitly claim that "credible legal authorities
who care about property rights argue that these concerns are
'overblown.'" Therefore, there is
no need for anybody to panic with regard to the behavior of the government of
Alberta. "There's nothing wrong
with the province's stated intentions," the article tells the readers in
order to placate their fears. The
government is full of great intentions including the following:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<ul style="margin-top: 0in;" type="disc">
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l1 level1 lfo4; tab-stops: list .5in;">More
public consultation</li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l1 level1 lfo4; tab-stops: list .5in;">Clear
compensation for the victims of expropriation by the state</li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l1 level1 lfo4; tab-stops: list .5in;">Access
to dispute resolution mechanisms, including the courts</li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l1 level1 lfo4; tab-stops: list .5in;">A
property rights advocate</li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l1 level1 lfo4; tab-stops: list .5in;">Alberta's
democratic government will be called in to protect private property</li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l1 level1 lfo4; tab-stops: list .5in;">Compensation
rights will be enshrined in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms</li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l1 level1 lfo4; tab-stops: list .5in;">The
constitutional amendment guaranteeing compensation will protect property
because the Alberta amendment will contain clear and non-vague language
unlike the American Constitution </li>
</ul>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
On the surface, it appears as though the <i>Frontier Centre</i>
has provided a well-rounded and balanced solution to the expropriation problem
in Alberta implying, of course, that Albertans can stop worrying about their
property and can therefore go on with their lives. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I will argue that the <i>Frontier Centre</i> has provided
Albertans with a false sense of security mainly because the proposed solutions
will not protect private property at all.
In some cases, such as those of calling for democracy to protect private
property and of demanding that taxpayers fund compensation for expropriation victims,
the proposed solutions will <i>undermine</i> private property rights in
Alberta, thus negating the article's intention to protect private
property. The major gap in the article
is that the <i>Frontier Centre's</i> proposals fail to address the inherently
exploitative nature of the state caused by the state's unique ability to
acquire property non-productively and/or non-contractually; consequently, the
article cannot possibly achieve its stated objective of protecting private
property. What the article actually accomplishes
is to offer a laundry list of "legitimizing" procedures and
"justifications" that are meant to justify the state's inherent
exploitative behavior. By legitimizing
and justifying the state, i.e., the right for the hypostatization of society to
seizure property non-contractually and/or non-productively, the <i>Frontier
Centre</i> has taken a position that is closer to conservative socialism and
social democracy than to laissez-faire capitalism. Therefore, I conclude that the <i>Frontier Centre</i> not only completely
fails to achieve its stated objective, which is to protect private property
from the state, but also aggravates the problem by actually making further
private property rights violations more likely to occur because of its
interminable justifying and legitimizing of the state. Contrary to its claim that "there's <i>nothing
wrong</i> with the province's stated intentions" (emphasis mine), I
conclude that the <i>Frontier Centre's </i>proposals are inherently unjust when
I subject its proposals to the Kantian categorical imperative. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>The Self-Refuting Nature of the Proposed Compensation
Solution:</u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The <i>Frontier Centre's </i>article refers on numerous
occasions to government compensation as an integral part of a feasible solution
for protecting private property owners from the actions of their
government. The author seems to take it
for granted that the government can atone for its sin of expropriating private
property by simply paying compensation "that reflects current values and
impacts." The author's position is
captured nicely when he writes:
"government is empowered to confiscate private property for 'public
use' if it is compensated."</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The author's argument neglects to ask the pertinent
question, namely, <i>how does the government get the resources in the first
place to pay for these subsequent compensation claims?</i> In his book <i>The Ethics of Liberty,</i>
Murray Rothbard demonstrates that governments, unlike ordinary citizens or
subjects, receive their income through extortion, i.e., through an organized
process of private property rights violations:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
For there is one crucially
important power inherent in the nature of the State apparatus. <i>All other</i> persons and groups in
society (except for acknowledged and sporadic criminals such as thieves and
bank robbers) obtain their income voluntarily:
<i>either</i> by selling goods and services to the consuming public, <i>or</i>
by voluntary gift...<i>Only</i> the State obtains its revenue by coercion, by
threatening dire penalties should the income not be forthcoming. That coercion is known as "taxation"...Taxation
is theft...even though it is theft on a grand and colossal scale which no
acknowledged criminals could hope to match.
<u>It [Taxation] is a compulsory seizure of the property of the State's
inhabitants, or subjects.</u> (162,
italics in the original, underlined emphasis mine)</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
To further illustrate why taxation, the means of paying for
the compensation, is theft of private property, consider Lysander Spooner's <i>No
Treason: The Constitution of No
Authority.</i> Spooner writes that </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
the government, like a highwayman,
says to a man: "Your money, or
your life." And many, if not most,
taxes are paid under the compulsion of that threat.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Spooner adds,</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
as taxation is made compulsory on
all, whether they vote or not, a large proportion of those who vote, no doubt
do so to prevent their own money being used against themselves. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The self-refuting nature of the compensation scheme is that
it tries to rectify the injustice of one private property rights violation (the
initial expropriation) by engaging in another private property rights violation
(the compulsory taxation of the people who are forced against their will to pay
for the initial compensation). </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>The Discrimination Problems in the Proposed
Compensation Plan:</u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Moreover, this proposed compensation arrangement by the <i>Frontier
Centre</i> is inconsistent with the classical liberal idea of the Rule of Law
because this compensation scheme implies legalized discrimination. To begin, consider the discussion of F. A.
Hayek, in his classic work <i>The Road to Serfdom</i> in which he compares the
legal theory of liberalism to that of National Socialism (Italics in the
original, underlined emphasis mine):</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
It is therefore not altogether
false when the legal theorist of National Socialism, Carl Schmitt, opposes to the
liberal <i>Rechststaat </i>(i.e., the Rule of Law) the National Socialist ideal
of the <i>gerechte Staat</i> ("the just state")--only that the sort
of justice <u>which is opposed to formal justice necessarily implies
discrimination between persons. </u>(117, footnote 5)</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The <i>Frontier Centre's </i>proposal to enshrine
compensation rights in the constitution, which will then be paid from
taxpayers' coercively seized property creates a legalized discrimination
problem by favoring the group of tax consumers (the receivers of the compensation)
at the expense of the group of taxpayers (those who are forced to pay for the
compensation). This discrimination
problem, highlighted by John C. Calhoun in his important 1851 work entitled <i>A
Disquisition on Government and a Discourse on the Constitution and Government
of the United States,</i> necessarily produces conflict between these two
groups over which group is the victim and which is the beneficiary of the
state. A strong incentive has been
created to seize control of the state in order to protect one group's interests
from the invasions of all other interests.
The tax consumers want to maintain their privileged relationship with
the state, and the tax producers want to seize the state in order to defend
themselves from the tax consumers or maybe even make themselves into tax
consumers too. Calhoun writes that</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
the right of suffrage, by placing
the control of the government in the community must, from the same constitution
of our nature which makes government necessary to preserve society, <i>lead to
conflict among its different interests,--each striving to obtain possession of
its powers, as the means of protecting itself against the others;</i>--or of
advancing its respective interests, regardless of the interests of others. (16, emphasis mine) </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In other words, the <i>Frontier Centre's </i>proposal sounds
as if it wants to advance the interests of the tax consumers, i.e., the
compensation receivers, at the expense of the taxpayers. Assume that there are some taxpayers who do
not own land and so never fear the threat of land expropriation, and note that
land expropriation seems to be the biggest worry in the article. Maybe these taxpayers earn all of their
income from labor. If the government
now engages in a land expropriation, then the constitutional compensation plan
will transfer wealth from labor income (taxpayers) to land income (tax
consumers) thus establishing a form of legalized discrimination against one
group in order to favor the other.
Since the article specifically mentions that it is addressing "a
series of 'land bills' that many said erode property rights," one has to
wonder whether the <i>Frontier Centre's </i>proposal for enshrined compensation
will result in nothing but permanent conflict between land income on the one
hand and labor and capital incomes on the other. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The first point to make is that what the <i>Frontier Centre </i>is
proposing to do cannot be classified as a cooperative social philosophy. Ludwig von Mises, in a 1945 paper entitled <i>Economics
as a Bridge for Interhuman Understanding,</i> calls this discriminatory process
of benefiting the initial expropriation victims at the expense of the others
taxpayers the <i>Montaigne fallacy</i>:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
The <i>Leitmotiv</i> of social
philosophy up to the emergence of economics was: The profit of one man is the damage of another; no man profits
but by the loss of others. <u>This is
not a philosophy of social cooperation, but of dissociation and social
disintegration.</u>... In the light of this Montaigne fallacy, human
intercourse cannot consist in anything but the spoliation of the weaker by the
stronger. (italics in the original,
underlined emphasis mine)</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The second point to make is that what the <i>Frontier Centre
</i>is proposing to do should be classified as unjust because the proposed
solution violates the <i>Kantian categorical imperative.</i> In <i>A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism,</i>
Hans-Hermann Hoppe explains that <i>just rules</i> must never be
"particularistic" in nature:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
the Kantian categorical imperative,
requires that in order to be just, a rule must be a <i>general</i> one <u>applicable
to every single person in the same way.</u>
The rule cannot specify different rights or obligations for different
categories of people (one for the red-headed, and one for others, or one for
women and a different one for men), <u>as such a "particularistic"
rule, naturally, could never, not even in principle, be accepted as a fair rule
</u>by everyone. (14, italics in the
original; underlined emphasis mine)</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
When the Kantian categorical imperative is applied to the <i>Frontier
Centre's</i> proposal, the unjust nature of this proposal becomes
self-evident. On the one hand, the land
owners, the victims of the land expropriation, are to be made whole through
compensation provided by the state. On
the other hand, the non-land owners are <i>not compensated</i> for the taxes
they have to pay to the state so that the state can pay for the compensation
claims. The land owners are made whole;
the non-land owners are <i>not</i> made whole (since taxpayers do not receive
compensation payments for the taxes they pay!)
Therefore, the <i>"making
people whole rule"</i> or the <i>"compensate the victim
rule" </i>is <b>NOT APPLIED to everybody in the same way;</b>
consequently, the proposed solution is "particularistic" in nature
thus rendering it unjust.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>The Faulty Assumption Underlying the Claim that
Compensation Discourages Expropriation:</u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The article's repetitive discussion of the value of
government compensation to the victims of property expropriate is probably
because the author makes a spurious assumption concerning the punitive
properties of compensation. The author
claims that</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
one major way to force
governments...to think twice about property seizure is the reality they will
have to compensate private citizens.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
This argument assumes that the government legitimately owns
property; consequently, forcing the government to pay compensation will be
painful for it because it will have to part with some of its property. The "cost" of expropriation to the
government will be the compensation that it will have to pay the victim. The problem is that this assumption is false;
the government does not and cannot legitimately own property. Therefore, the government does not suffer
any pain from having to pay out compensation claims to expropriation victims. As Murray N Rothbard trenchantly observed in
his book <i>The Ethics of Liberty, </i>the state owns no legitimate property;
hence, compensation imposes no cost on the state since the state as a
non-producing is not losing anything that it had to earn in the first place:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
If the State, then, is a vast
engine of institutionalized crime and aggression, the "organization of the
political means" to wealth, then this means that the State is a criminal
organization, and that therefore its moral status is radically different from
any of the just property-owners that we have been discussing in this volume.
... For, as a criminal organization with all of its income and assets derived
from a crime of taxation, <i>the State cannot possess any just property.</i> (183, emphasis in the original)</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Therefore, the author of the article is naive when he thinks
that government will feel pain by having to pay compensation. What the author is actually doing is
proposing in the name of property rights the implementation of a
constitutionally enshrined social democratic principle, i.e., the complete
opposite of property rights. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Social democracy, at least the social democracy practiced in
West Germany, has, I think, some parallels with what the <i>Frontier Centre </i>is
doing here in this article. Notice how
in both cases, i.e., in the West German social democracy case study and in the
think tank's article, they both pay lip service to private ownership and to the
possibility of socialization, while permitting and even favoring redistribution
of property titles (the compensation scheme, which redistributes property
titles from the taxpayers to the victims of the government's initial
expropriation). As Hans-Hermann Hoppe
explains in <i>A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism</i>,</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
Here [i.e., in West Germany], in
1959, the social democrats adopted (or rather were forced by public opinion to
adopt) a new party program in which all obvious traces of a Marxist past were
conspicuously absent, that rather explicitly mentioned the importance of
private ownership and markets, that talked about socialization only as a mere
possibility, and that instead heavily stressed the importance of redistributive
measures. (59)</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i>The Frontier Centre</i> is following the West German
social democratic model in its article in all regards. First, the article mentions repeatedly the
importance of private ownership. For
example, the article states: "They want governments to make it harder, not
easier, to seize their property."
Notice that the recommendation still permits socialization as a
possibility because the recommendation did not say "ban" seizure property
unequivocally but rather just said "make it harder to do." Finally, the article proposes a guaranteed
income redistribution scheme under the name of "compensation" when it
mentions that "they want compensation that reflects current values and
impacts."</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Why then is the <i>Frontier Centre </i>advocating social
democracy, i.e., what Hoppe refers to as Type II Socialism (See <i>A Theory of
Socialism and Capitalism</i>, 12)?
Notice that the policy recommendation made by the <i>Frontier Centre</i>
is to utilize a written constitution in order to protect private property. The article is rather explicit on this
point: "The answer may be to take
the issue out of the hands of provincial legislatures by enshrining rights to
compensation in our Charter."
This, of course, is consistent with classical liberal thought. To cite one of the great classical liberal
minds, Ludwig von Mises, writing in his 1927 book:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
All these disadvantages [of being a
member of a national minority] are felt to be very oppressive even in a state
with a liberal constitution in which the activity of the government is
restricted to the protection of the life and property of the citizens. (89)</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The problem is that classical liberal thought is a dead end
philosophically. Not only does
classical liberalism have an implementation problem, but it also is
unsustainable because it will naturally degrade into social democracy. The liberal philosopher Ludwig von Mises
understands that an implementation problem exists in classical liberal
thought. These ideas sound good on
paper, but they just cannot be implemented even by those who subscribe to
liberal ideas in the first place:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
Even liberal politicians, on
gaining power, have usually relegated their liberal principles more or less to
the background. The tendency to impose
oppressive restraints on private property, to abuse political power, and to
refuse to respect or recognize any free sphere outside or beyond the dominion
of the state is too deeply ingrained in the mentality of those who control the
governmental apparatus of compulsion and coercion for them ever to be able to
resist it voluntarily. (44)</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Even more menacing is how classical liberalism has a
built-in self-destruct mechanism in the sense that liberalism will naturally
fall apart and will be supplanted by social democracy. Hans-Hermann Hoppe, in <i>Democracy: The God that Failed,</i> summarizes this
self-destruct mechanism of liberalism by emphasizing that the fundamental error
committed by liberals is assigning a moral status to the state:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
Because of its own fundamental
error regarding the moral status of government, liberalism actually contributed
to the destruction of everything it had originally set out to preserve and
protect: liberty and property. Once the principle of government had been
incorrectly accepted, it was only a matter of time until the ultimate triumph
of socialism over liberalism....liberalism in its present form has no
future. Rather, its future is social
democracy, and the future has already arrived (and we know that it does not work).</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Therefore, despite the use of classically liberal ideas by
the <i>Frontier Centre</i>--especially the idea of chaining a government down
with a written constitution so that the government is solely a life and
property protector<i>, </i>they are ultimately, in the final analysis,
advocating for social democracy whether or not they decide to do so. This explains why the article from the <i>Frontier
Centre</i> is the same as the policy proposals of the social democratic West
Germany. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>The Impossibility of Protecting Private Property
through a Written Constitution:</u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The article references the Canadian Charter with a new
compensation amendment as an integral part of the <i>Frontier Centre's</i>
solution to the property expropriation problem in Alberta. The author seems to think that his
constitutional mandatory compensation proposal is feasible because, unlike the
Americans, his constitutional amendment will avoid the pitfall of
"vague" language. For
example, the author of the article states (all emphasis mine):</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<ul style="margin-top: 0in;" type="disc">
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l2 level1 lfo2; tab-stops: list .5in;">The
answer may be to take the issue out of the hands of provincial
legislatures by <i>enshrining rights to compensation in our Charter,</i>
but also avoiding the situation in the U.S. where <i>vague wording in
their Constitution</i> leaves property vulnerable.</li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l2 level1 lfo2; tab-stops: list .5in;">At the
same time they could clearly define "public use" to avoid the
problems U.S. landowners discovered.</li>
</ul>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The most obvious objection to raise against the <i>Frontier
Centre's </i>proposed solution is to look at the case study of the German
reunification and conclude that what the <i>Frontier Centre</i> is proposing to
do in Alberta has been tried before and it failed lamentably. As Hans-Hermann Hoppe explains in <i>Democracy: The God that Failed</i>, the German
reunification explicitly guaranteed private property rights, thereby satisfying
the <i>Frontier Centre's </i>demand for non-vague language. Moreover, as Hoppe observes, there was a
specific constitutional requirement to provide compensation in (the now former)
East Germany. Despite the non-vague and
literal constitutional requirements for compensation to be paid to the victims
of expropriation, i.e., despite fulfilling all of the <i>Frontier Centre's </i>requirements,
the German experiment demonstrates that neither of these provisions work in the
real world (emphasis mine):</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
Despite <i>the constitutional guarantee
of private property</i> by the (West) German constitution, for instance, the
German supreme court, after the German reunification in 1990, declared all
communist expropriations prior to the founding of the East German state in 1949
"valid." Thus, more than 50
percent of former East Germany's land used for agriculture were appropriated by
the (West) German state <i>(rather than being returned to the original private
owners, as required by a literal interpretation of the constitution). </i>(110-111, footnote 7)</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
So even a "literal interpretation" of the
constitutional "guarantee" does not ensure anything because the
Supreme Court can simply follow the German example and "declare"
arbitrarily that expropriations are "valid." Consequently, one must ask, if "explicit
constitutional guarantees" and "literal interpretations of the
constitution" are of tenuous value because of the credible threat of court
tyranny (i.e., arbitrary actions, see <i>Democracy: The God that Failed, </i>page 42, footnote 46), then has the <i>Frontier
Centre</i> merely offered us a paper tiger solution to the problem of property
expropriation in Alberta? <br />
<br style="mso-special-character: line-break;" /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
What is going on here is simply the fact that the <i>Frontier
Centre</i> is using the wrong means to achieve its desired end. To achieve the desired end of justice (i.e.,
compensation for the victims), the <i>Frontier Centre</i> proposes to use the
means of the court system. The problem
is that for this proposal to work, the court system must make decisions
objectively not subjectively. The
German case study suggests that the courts can very well behave subjectively by
"declaring" expropriations "valid" despite what a literal
interpretation of the constitution requires.
The means of appealing to the court system in order to enforce a
constitutional protection of property will result not in justice but rather in
injustice because of the danger of subjectivity with regard to property
titles. Notice in Hans-Hermann Hoppe's
discussion of this subjective-objective problem in <i>A Theory of Socialism and
Capitalism </i>that the German Supreme Court behaves exactly in the manner of
someone holding a subjective view toward property. Just as the German Supreme Court "declared" the
communist expropriations in East Germany as "valid," so too the
subjective allocation of property "declares" what <i>should</i> be
(italics emphasis in the original; underlining emphasis is mine):</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
[Claims to property] would be based
exclusively on subjective opinion, i.e., on a <u>merely verbal declaration</u> that things should be this or that way. Of course, such verbal claims could (and
very likely always will) point to certain <i>facts,</i> too ("I am bigger,
I am smarter, I am poorer or I am very special, etc.!"), and could thereby
try to legitimize themselves. <u>But
facts such as these do not (and cannot) establish any objective link</u>
between a given scarce resource and any particular person(s). Everyone's ownership of every particular
resource can equally well be established or excluded on such grounds. <u>It is such property claims, derived from
thin air, with purely verbal links between owners and things owned, which,
according to the natural theory of property, are called aggressive.</u> (24)</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In summary, the <i>Frontier Centre's </i>proposal fails
because it contradicts the underlying theory of the above discussion, namely,
the natural theory of property. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>The Failure to Address the Natural Theory of Property:</u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
To further illustrate how the <i>Frontier Centre</i> has
totally ignored the natural theory of property, consider how they permit the
government to expropriate property as long as... and they give certain
qualifications such as mandatory compensation and non-vague language for
"public use" and so on.
Notice that they never question the legitimacy of expropriation in the
first place; the legitimacy of "forced sales" of private property to
government is never questioned. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The concept of property includes the important fact that
property owners have exclusive jurisdiction over how to dispose of their
property. "Every individual has
the right to dispose of his property as he sees fit," argues Benjamin
Tucker (see David Osterfeld, <i>Freedom, Society, and the State,</i> Article 33
in <i>Anarchy and the Law</i>, 515). Or
as Murray Rothbard states in <i>Man, Economy, and State with Power and Market</i>
that "'Economic power,' then, is simply the right under freedom to refuse
to make an exchange" (1,327). Consequently, a property owner can sell his
or her property or not; a property owner can agree to transfer his property or
not to someone else. As Hans-Hermann
Hoppe writes in <i>A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism, </i>property is
something that is transferred non-aggressively; there is no such concept in the
natural theory of property that permits aggressive seizure followed by
compensation:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
This system [of pure capitalism and
of pure private property] is based on the idea that to be nonaggressive, claims
to property must be backed by the "objective" fact of an act of
original appropriation, of previous ownership, or by a mutually beneficial
contractual relationship. This
relationship can either be a deliberate cooperation between property owners or
the deliberate transfer of property titles from one owner to another. (29)</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
This "forced sale" of private property, which the
government supposedly "thinks twice about," (which of course is also
impossible because a "government" cannot "think"), is a non-cooperative transfer of private
property titles. This is certainly not
an "exchange" since it is not only involuntary in its nature but
also, as mentioned earlier, the state does not own any just property and hence
owns nothing that could be used to facilitate an exchange. But as Hoppe said above, the relationship
must be a "transfer of property titles <i>from one owner to another."</i> This definition, then, precludes the state
from engaging in exchanges because the state is, also by definition, a
non-owner of property. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
(it says: deliberate
transfer of property titles from one owner to another--but as Rothbard
says: governments don't own
anything--so an "exchange" with the government doesn't exist)</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>The Fallacy of Hypostatization:</u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The article engages in confused epistemology as demonstrated
by its reliance on the public good or common good type language. The article repeatedly makes this
epistemological error (emphasis is mine):</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<ul style="margin-top: 0in;" type="disc">
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l3 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in;"><i>Albertans
want</i> a more rigorous consultation process...[and a list of all the
other things that <i>Albertans</i> apparently want]</li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l3 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in;"><i>The
provincial government should not feel</i> it can now shut down debate</li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l3 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in;">The
power is inescapably necessary in the <i>interests of government</i></li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l3 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in;">The <i>government
said</i> they will review</li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l3 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in;">Government
is empowered to confiscate private property for <i>"public use" </i>purposes</li>
</ul>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In all of these examples, the author has erroneous assigned
real existence to or has personified government and society, i.e., the
collective. "In the sciences of
human action," writes Ludwig von Mises in <i>The Ultimate Foundation of
Economic Science,</i> "the most conspicuous instance of this fallacy is
the way in which the term <i>society</i> is employed by various schools of
pseudo science" (71). In direct
contradistinction to the claim made by the <i>Frontier Centre, </i>Mises
stresses that society "does not have 'interests' and does not aim at
anything" (71). The reason why
Mises denies the claims of the <i>Frontier Centre</i>, i.e., the claims about
the "interests" of government and the "actions" of
government is because these claims violate the fundamental axiom of
action. As Murray Rothbard explains in
his magnum opus <i>Man, Economy, and State with Power and Market</i>,</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
The first truth to be discovered
about human action is that <i>it can be undertaken only by individual
"actors." </i>Only
individuals have ends and can act to attain them. There are no such things as ends of or actions by
"groups," "collectives," or "States," which do
not take place as actions by various specific individuals. (2, emphasis in the
original)</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The epistemological inconsistency in the <i>Frontier Centre</i>
article is that the author seems to take collectivism as a given with his
multiple references to the "acting" collective and to the
"interests" of the collective and hence falls into the
epistemological fallacy of hypostatization, but then he also claims to support
individuals and hence methodological individualism when he writes, "the
power of government to expropriate at any level may be a scary exercise of
power over individuals." But if he
takes the first position, the collectivist one, then he necessarily cannot take
the second one as well since they are mutually exclusive positions:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
In the so-called social sciences it
more often than not serves definite political aspirations in claiming for the
collective as such a higher dignity than for the individual or even ascribing
real existence only to the collective and denying the existence of the
individual, calling it a mere abstraction.
(Mises 2006, 71)</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
So this creates an insoluble problem for the author of the <i>Frontier
Centre</i> article. How does he expect
to resolve disputes between the "collective," which supposedly is
represented by the government, the plenipotentiary of the "common
good," and the individual, the victim of the state's aggressive act of
property expropriation? How is the
dispute between the hypostatization of the collectivists and the methodological
individualism of the victim individual to be resolved? The author of the article claims that the
solution is to take the dispute to a monopoly government court. As well shall see next, this is no solution
at all to the problem of the "collective" versus the individual. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>The Meaninglessness of Offering Victims of
Expropriation Access to the Courts:</u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The article seems to take it for granted that offering
victims of expropriation access to the courts will somehow make this entire
process of property expropriation legitimate.
The most obvious problem with this recommendation is that the victim of
expropriation has only one choice, namely, to go to the government's approved
dispute resolution mechanism or court system.
The victim has no choice here due to the monopoly nature of the judicial
system. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
This solution might very well lead to an injustice because
the government might end up functioning as both the defendant in the
expropriation case and the adjudicator over its own trial. As Murray N Rothbard points out in <i>The
Anatomy of the State,</i> such an arrangement in which the government serves as
both defendant and judge is inherently unjust:
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
Black admits that this means that
the State has set itself up as a judge in its own cause, thus violating a basic
juridical principle for aiming at just decisions. (34)</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In addition, the logical inconsistency problem raised by
Gustave de Molinari most likely exists in the <i>Frontier Centre's </i>proposals. They claim that private property ought to be
protected by a written constitution, which implies a classical liberal view
with regard to property. This strongly
implies that their position will tend to be consistent with that of liberal
economists. But now when discussing the
court system, the <i>Frontier Centre </i>is most likely falling into the
logical inconsistency problem that French liberals also fell into by assuming that
the public's demand for "access to courts" means access to government
monopoly courts. Nobody is going to
assume that when they write "access to courts" they really mean
access to <i>private and competing courts</i> as existed, for example, in
English history (see footnote 3 of <i>The Production of Security</i> with de
Molinari's reference to Adam Smith's <i>The Wealth of Nations</i>) especially
given their website's consistently statist comments such as "strengthening
democracy," "popularizing public choices, and "high performance
government." The logical
inconsistency problem de Molinari observes in his book entitled <i>The
Production of Security</i> is that economists tend to favor free markets i.e.,
a non-monopoly world in most areas but then contradict themselves by supporting
a state-monopoly over the justice system:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
True economists are generally
agreed, on the one hand, that the government should restrict itself to
guaranteeing the security of its citizens, and on the other, that the freedom
of labor and of trade should otherwise be whole and absolute. But why should there be an exception
relative to security? What special
reason is there that the production of security cannot be relegated to free
competition?...On this point, the masters of the science are silent, and [Charles]
Dunoyer, who has clearly noted this exception, does not investigate the grounds
on which it is based (Chapter 3 of <i>The Production of Security</i>). </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The inconsistency in liberal thought was put starkly by
Hans-Hermann Hoppe in <i>Democracy: The
God that Failed </i>when he writes that</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
the liberal solution to the eternal
human problem of security--a constitutionally limited government--is a
contradictory, praxeologically impossible ideal. Contrary to the original liberal intent of safeguarding liberty
and property, every minimal government has the inherent tendency to become a
maximal government. (229)</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>Conclusion:</u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The <i>Frontier Centre's </i>article appears to be a
well-reasoned defense of private property rights in Alberta. The fundamental error that the author makes,
which then causes him to make all of his other errors, is that the author
assumes that the existence of government is compatible with private
property. It appears as if the purpose
for writing this paper was not so much to defend private property rights as to
legitimize the State's expropriation of property. Probably the best quotation from the <i>Frontier Centre's</i>
article that clearly demonstrates this fact is this unbelievably sycophantic
statement, a statement no true defender of private property would ever utter
because it effectively justifies exploitation, at least in the <i>pre-Marxian</i>
sense of the term:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
More public consultation, clear
compensation, and access to dispute resolution mechanisms, and access to
dispute resolution mechanisms, including courts, are all important, so on the
surface there's nothing wrong with the province's stated intentions. Once we figure out exactly how a real-life
property rights advocate works that could be positive.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
From this quotation in particular and from the article in
general, the author reveals that he has fallen into the "naive mainstream
economist" trap, thus rendering his entire paper rather useless for the
defense of property because the underlying views are starry-eyed and utopian. Hans-Hermann Hoppe, in his paper entitled <i>Marxist
and Austrian Class Analysis</i> (Journal of Libertarian Studies, Fall
1990) puts it best when he observes
that</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
Marxism, because it correctly
interprets the state as exploitative (unlike, for example, the public choice
school, which sees it as normal firm among others), is onto some important
insights regarding the logic of state operations. (86)</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
However, the "naive mainstream economist" problem
is the least of our concern. <b><u>The
article is ultimately a defense of exploitation in the <i>pre-Marxian</i>
French radical laissez-faire sense of the term "exploitation." </u></b> (This qualification is necessary because the
term "exploitation" has been misconstrued by socialist and Marxian
authors ever since). In <i>The
Economics and Ethics of Private Property, </i> Hoppe writes that</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
the traditional, correct
pre-Marxist view on exploitation was that...antagonistic interests do not exist
between capitalists as owners of factors of production and laborers, but
between, on the one hand, the producers in society, i.e., homesteaders,
producers and contractors, including businessmen as <i>well</i> as workers, and
on the other hand, <u>those who acquire wealth nonproductively and/or
noncontractually, i.e., the state and state-privileged groups,</u> such as
feudal lords. (96, footnote 18, italics
in the original; underlined emphasis mine)</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Or to put this point more starkly, Hans-Hermann Hoppe writes
in his paper <i>Marxist and Austrian Class Analysis</i> (Journal of Libertarian
Studies, Fall 1990) that <b>the state is exploitative precisely because it can
acquire property through expropriation:</b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
The state is not exploitative
because it protects the capitalists' property rights, but because it itself is <i>exempt
from the restriction of having to acquire property productively and
contractually.</i> (86, emphasis mine) </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The <i>Frontier Centre</i> fails completely to address the
exploitation problem. In fact, their
entire article seems to pre-suppose that the inherent exploitative nature of
the state is acceptable as long as certain <b>"legitimizing factors"</b>
are added into the equation after the fact.
In my paper, I have tried to demonstrate, again and again, how this is
the essence of their paper. To
recapitulate some of the pertinent examples:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<ul style="margin-top: 0in;" type="disc">
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo3; tab-stops: list .5in;">The
tax and compensate discussion was an attempt to justify the state's right
to involuntarily tax citizens by claiming that taxation is acceptable
because it is doing something good, i.e., providing compensation. </li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo3; tab-stops: list .5in;">The
claim that compensation is "punitive" to the state is meant to
legitimize the state's claim of being a just owner of property in the
first place. This allegedly
"legitimate" property owner is then "punished" by
being forced to pay compensation. </li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo3; tab-stops: list .5in;">The
appeal to the written constitution as the means for protecting private
property is meant to legitimize the idea that a contract has been entered
into by the population. As
Hans-Hermann Hoppe mentions in <i>Democracy: The God that Failed,</i> "since Locke, liberals have
tried to solve this internal contradiction through the makeshift of
'tacit,' 'implicit' or 'conceptual' agreements, contracts, or
constitutions" (228).</li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo3; tab-stops: list .5in;">The
article goes to great length to stress that the government's process is
"legitimate" by almost obsessively mentioning phrases such
as: "public
consultation," "democratically-elected legislature," and
"don't shut down debate."
The language implies that the government's behavior is legitimate
because it has procured <i>the consent of the governed.</i> Notice further how the <i>Frontier
Centre</i> bends over backwards to imply that the government has gone out
of its way in order to ensure the consent of the governed. As an example of this point, they write
that "the Alberta Government has completed a landmark consultation
with almost 1,500 Albertans."
</li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo3; tab-stops: list .5in;">The
reason why the <i>Frontier Centre</i> has to establish the legitimacy of
the government's behavior through such means as "public
consultation," "democratically-elected legislation,"
"written constitutions with enshrined rights," "access to
the courts," "hypostatization of the state," and
"public debates," is because it has to convince people first
that the government has legitimate consent so that it can then justify the
subjective (not objective) transfers of property by the Alberta
government. Carl Watner writes in his paper <i>"Oh, Ye Are For
Anarchy!": Consent Theory in
the Radical Libertarian Tradition," </i>that there exists a strong
link between the government's perceived consent and private property
rights. Watner writes that
"[William] Molyneux clearly understood the relationship between
property rights and consent.
'Consent is a necessary condition for the transfer of title. To use or dispose of another person's
property without his consent is the fundamental act of injustice.'" </li>
</ul>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In summary, what the <i>Frontier Centre </i>has done in this
article is it has legitimized the State by implying that Albertans have given
their consent to the government's expropriation of property and to its
aggressive transfers of property titles.
The <i>Frontier Centre</i> has not succeeded at all in defending private
property because it has defended the State, the biggest and most dangerous
threat to property. Therefore, the <i>Frontier
Centre's</i> article is self-refuting because one does not defend property by
first defending its opposite, i.e., the state.
The entire article boiled down to its most fundamental essence is
simply, as Murray Rothbard put it in his book <i>Classical Economics: An Austrian Perspective on the History of
Economic Thought,</i> a textbook example of "the preposterous necromancy
of the 'dialectic'" (334).</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: right;">
Neil Matthew Tokar</div>
<div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: right;">
Niagara-on-the-Lake,
Ontario</div>
<div align="right" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: right;">
May 5, 2012<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjYwQcyeuihPI1Rh0KsjKIzBL2sCv4Mz1WBL5W_oHxxMycRDxAfa6Kb88STpPXJe6vIMUjVzZ7r9AnpOk6CEp56kkincv73w61AMMlryjRkLii4zJ6Z8aS-DofHsiOWgCbiX22zJ31kXhyphenhyphenD/s1600/Anarcho+Capitalism+Flag+3.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="310" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjYwQcyeuihPI1Rh0KsjKIzBL2sCv4Mz1WBL5W_oHxxMycRDxAfa6Kb88STpPXJe6vIMUjVzZ7r9AnpOk6CEp56kkincv73w61AMMlryjRkLii4zJ6Z8aS-DofHsiOWgCbiX22zJ31kXhyphenhyphenD/s320/Anarcho+Capitalism+Flag+3.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
</div>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14408794074799022329noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6741330243979105436.post-33300358093813602822012-06-14T14:13:00.001-04:002012-06-14T15:38:26.865-04:00How to Not Care What Other People ThinkI wrestled with this problem before, so I found this link very fruitful. I took personality tests before and scored INTP--so the human interaction stuff has always been a struggle for me--until I started following this advice. When I stopped caring about what other people thought and just did I wanted to do, I saw instantaneous improvement. So this is why I am recommending this link: <a href="http://30sleeps.com/blog/2007/09/12/how-to-not-care-what-other-people-think/"><i>How to Not Care What Other People Think.</i></a><br />
<br />
<i> </i>Here are some of my favorite quotes from this link:<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
The biggest roadblock that is holding most of us back from living exactly the life we want is entirely self-created: It's that we actually <i><b>care what other people think.</b></i></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Caring what other people think will ensure you live a small life. The biggest risk we can take is to <i><b>not risk</b></i> <i><b>being who we really are.</b></i> No matter what you do, <i><b>you will polarize people,</b></i> so you might as well be yourself. <i><b>You owe it to the world to be <u>authentic.</u></b></i></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
To experience rejection on a massive scale, go out into the world and <i><b>talk to everyone.</b></i> Don't go with the intention of getting anything, just do it to <i><b>prove to yourself that rejection is no big deal.</b></i></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
The only person you need validation from is <i><b>yourself.</b></i></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
The most adrenaline-pumping risk you can take in life <i><b>is to be yourself. </b></i></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Imagine what your life would be like if you <i><b>just did what you wanted to do.</b></i></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
What matters most is your energy. Not entertainment monkey gymnastic energy, but the <i><b>awe-inspiring courage you have to go for exactly what you want</b></i> and make yourself vulnerable.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Do you need a relationship to feel "complete" <i><b>or do you blaze your own trail</b></i> and <i><b>let others come along for the ride?</b></i> </blockquote>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjDBziEu_WjHZbmJkcd4hQ_Q1o_M2lEF0bq8gqoUAbfm9ZeZs6PZyw6RGOiGbxKF77aLWACjWwI_dkOqovVjVBx4BlPuJbN2ddKYpCij6oBYbN39nAviKfis5GNpHzxOi1qMUV5AcIXGLAl/s1600/Tristan+Finley+photoshopped+super+sexy+an+cap+girl+on+the+beach.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="222" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjDBziEu_WjHZbmJkcd4hQ_Q1o_M2lEF0bq8gqoUAbfm9ZeZs6PZyw6RGOiGbxKF77aLWACjWwI_dkOqovVjVBx4BlPuJbN2ddKYpCij6oBYbN39nAviKfis5GNpHzxOi1qMUV5AcIXGLAl/s320/Tristan+Finley+photoshopped+super+sexy+an+cap+girl+on+the+beach.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
</blockquote>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14408794074799022329noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6741330243979105436.post-77559051022051484102012-06-13T23:37:00.001-04:002012-06-13T23:37:52.168-04:00An Elegant Definition of Anarcho-capitalismThis is one of my favorite definitions of Anarcho-capitalism. This definition is from Hans-Hermann Hoppe's <i>The Economics and Ethics of Private Property </i>page 378. I suppose one might object to the fact that Hoppe doesn't mention the "non-aggression principle." However, I think the non-aggression principle is implied: private property law exists to protect both person and property from aggressive invasions. <br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
It refutes as ethically unjustifiable and economically counterproductive actions such as taxation, the legislative redistribution of private property rights, the creation of fiat money, fractional reserve banking, and ultimately, the very institution of state government. It demands instead a pure private property society, an anarchy of private property owners, regulated exclusively by private property law.</blockquote>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj-wZzI0tbbwhqudI0WM3YSf4M5447FNls8Bj1w1YnQzBtlRFvKP1MPQVRQafUDdzBz2bci_nUlZoGoZs9othU5McNKg_mFZ3omibcY19eO_l1oc247or_Mj-E2TSRRV6jIwzq8tDvSEWTm/s1600/Non+Watermarked+Anarcho+Capitalist+Flag.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj-wZzI0tbbwhqudI0WM3YSf4M5447FNls8Bj1w1YnQzBtlRFvKP1MPQVRQafUDdzBz2bci_nUlZoGoZs9othU5McNKg_mFZ3omibcY19eO_l1oc247or_Mj-E2TSRRV6jIwzq8tDvSEWTm/s320/Non+Watermarked+Anarcho+Capitalist+Flag.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14408794074799022329noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6741330243979105436.post-60349550123516768832012-06-13T12:52:00.002-04:002012-06-13T12:53:23.934-04:00Liberalism Tending Toward Sheer AnarchismThis is one of my favorite quotations on what it means to be a <i>real</i> liberal. Hard-core liberals tend to turn into anarchists!<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="font-family: Times,"Times New Roman",serif;">
<h6 class="uiStreamMessage" data-ft="{"type":1,"tn":"K"}">
<span style="font-size: large;"><span class="messageBody">[Augustin] Thierry unequivocally enunciates the cosmopolitanism of a liberalism tending toward sheer anarchism:<br /> <br />
States are merely "incoherent agglomerations that divide the European
population...Eventually, the bonds linking men to states will be shed....
The tendency toward government, the first passion of the human race,
will cede to the free community. The era of empire is over, the era of
association begins."<br /> <br /> --Ralph Raico. Classical Liberal Roots of the Marxist Doctrine of Classes </span></span></h6>
</blockquote>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgBNOHPi74hjS6zCWcX7BRM87i_BYPnY6bb74vIE_Dh1xBor81REO63uPTsY_pBOsbJzhTT7nBjyyRQI4EBK-I0NXgJ1YIB1LCWlEmfeP3OMGlkO76w1Bh6-9RVKWObjWFg_dUtYyQymKto/s1600/Augustin+Thierry.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgBNOHPi74hjS6zCWcX7BRM87i_BYPnY6bb74vIE_Dh1xBor81REO63uPTsY_pBOsbJzhTT7nBjyyRQI4EBK-I0NXgJ1YIB1LCWlEmfeP3OMGlkO76w1Bh6-9RVKWObjWFg_dUtYyQymKto/s1600/Augustin+Thierry.jpg" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<i>Augustin Thierry</i> (1795-1856)</div>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14408794074799022329noreply@blogger.com0