Liberty Forged

the State has no money of its own, so it has no power of its own. ` Nock

Posts Tagged ‘Rothbard’

whatever neffs

Posted by Jesse on March 14, 2009

if business owners expected “customers” to steal and murder, who would ever open a business?

if i pay for a service i expect what i paid for. if i don’t receive good service, why would i want to continue paying for it?

are you looking forward to your social security check in how ever many decades? i know i’m not. where’s the measure of success? i want to see some competition!

if the government is going to give my money to failed banks, “defense” contractors, jail people who smoke pot and try to prop up economic policies that don’t work, or even “invest” in some broad long-term Obama-vision that no one can seem to explain or agree on, why would i want to pay or invest in such an idea? the problem is, unlike in a free market, what choice do i have? they just take the money. and that’s supposed to be a good example of good government?

and then on top of that we have an organization that tries to rule the market too!

Unnatural Disaster by Thomas Woods

“As with all goods, the supply and demand for lending capital determines the price. If more families are saving or more banks are lending, borrowers don’t have to pay as much to borrow, and interest rates go down. If there’s a rush to borrow or a dearth of lending capital, interest rates go up.”

“Thus the interest rate coordinates production across time. It ensures a compatible mix of market forces: if people want to consume now, businesses respond accordingly; if people want to consume in the future, businesses allocate resources to satisfy that desire. The interest rate can perform this coordinating function only if it is allowed to move freely in response to changes in supply and demand. If the Fed manipulates the interest rate, we should not be surprised by discoordination on a massive scale.”

“The more the Fed inflates, the worse the reckoning will be. Every new wave of artificial credit deforms the capital structure further, making the inevitable bust more severe because so much more capital will have been squandered and so many more resources misallocated.”

Also see:

What is the Free Market by Murray Rothbard

The House Poor by Karen de Coster

And it’s this type of analysis I equate with law and rulers. If a dictator ignores the people’s cries [consumer demand] and continues to press on and oppress, eventually there will be all out war. Dictatorial rule is known for ignoring what people need and want. It destroys prosperity and trust. the ruler is acting in self-interest and is only concerned with the general welfare in so far as it affects self-interest. and the general welfare is defined by whatever the laws are, not what you or I think it may be.

i don’t expect you to agree with me, i don’t expect to change your mind, but if you claim to be able to empathize with “poor” people, or “minorities”, then i expect that one should be able to understand a very simple principle as letting people keep what is rightfully theirs, and not simply say “we’re taking from you for your own good”. you have to be able to convince those people and not just oppress them with your political programs. that’s not a very good long-term strategy to say the least.

Posted in Mine | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Question – what is up?

Posted by Jesse on March 12, 2009

Has this post degenerated? Or are we merely revealing the fundamentals? The nation is confronting the excesses and looking for leadership and concrete solutions to the problems and losses in prosperity and civil liberties that have been exposed – slowly but surely. Do we not need to know the function of government before we can allocate resources to it? The impetus of my arguments drive at the notion that the fundamentals in gov’t and “the economy” are being assumed, but not audited. Which is why people that I listen to for leadership make the claims that these measures we see being proposed by so many (in the three branches of gov’t) are not going to fix the problems but exacerbate them. This is why Ron Paul always stresses that we cannot address these issues without confronting the role of government in our lives. That’s why he is my President, by choice.

Posted in Mine | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Radically hating the State

Posted by Jesse on March 9, 2009

Last on the Colbert Agenda was an author, I missed his name, but he mentioned Joseph Priestley. He made the claim that Priestley and others were very influential in the beginnings of the American nation, despite the fact its not exactly a household name.

In Rothbards Do you Hate the State? he credits Priestley among others of being radical in a true sense of the word.

Perhaps the word that best defines our distinction is “radical.” Radical in the sense of being in total, root-and-branch opposition to the existing political system and to the State itself. Radical in the sense of having integrated intellectual opposition to the State with a gut hatred of its pervasive and organized system of crime and injustice. Radical in the sense of a deep commitment to the spirit of liberty and anti-statism that integrates reason and emotion, heart and soul.

Furthermore, in contrast to what seems to be true nowadays, you don’t have to be an anarchist to be radical in our sense, just as you can be an anarchist while missing the radical spark. I can think of hardly a single limited governmentalist of the present day who is radical – a truly amazing phenomenon, when we think of our classical liberal forbears who were genuinely radical, who hated statism and the States of their day with a beautifully integrated passion: the Levellers, Patrick Henry, Tom Paine, Joseph Priestley, the Jacksonians, Richard Cobden, and on and on, a veritable roll call of the greats of the past. Tom Paine’s radical hatred of the State and statism was and is far more important to the cause of liberty than the fact that he never crossed the divide between laissez-faire and anarchism.

This in turn recalled a book I read last year: The Betrayal of the American Right. In Chapter 2 Rothbard mentions Priestley, among others. He says:

The conventional historical wisdom asserts that while the radical movements in America were indeed laissez-faire individualist before the Civil War, that afterwards, the laissez-fairists became conservatives, and the radical mantle then fell to groups more familiar to the modern Left: the Socialists and Populists. But this is a distortion of the truth. For it was elderly New England Brahmins, laissez-faire merchants and industrialists like Edward Atkinson, who had financed John Brown’s raid at Harper’s Ferry, who were the ones to leap in and oppose the U.S. imperialism of the Spanish-American War with all their might. No opposition to that war was more thoroughgoing than that of the laissez-faire economist and sociologist William Graham Sumner or than that of Atkinson who, as head of the Anti-Imperialist League, mailed antiwar pamphlets to American troops then engaged in conquering the Philippines. Atkinson’s pamphlets urged our troops to mutiny, and were consequently seized by the US postal authorities.

In taking this stand, Atkinson, Sumner and their colleagues were not being “sports”; they were following an antiwar, anti-imperialist tradition as old as classical liberalism itself. This was the tradition of Price, Priestley, and the late eighteenth-century British radicals that earned them repeated imprisonment by the British war machine; and of Richard Cobden, John Bright, and the laissez-faire Manchester School of the mid-nineteenth century. Cobden, in particular, had fearlessly denounced every war and every imperial maneuver of the British regime. We are now so used to thinking of opposition to imperialism as Marxian that this kind of movement seems almost inconceivable to us today.1

See the article on Mises.org

Posted in Mine | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Ron Paul on the World Bank mission, failure, and bureaucracy. Plus Russia Today covers the Ron Paul phenomenon! And a special bonus video!

Posted by Jesse on October 12, 2008

This question was ingenious. Only a small minority understood the significance of that question.

Thank you Paul for putting it on the record. McCain, you don’t know what your job entails. Oh, that’s right you do. You are going to be a good little puppet, aren’t you?

Curious? Have a look at this one page article : Ron Paul, A Most Unusual Politician


Posted in antiwar, Constitution, Current Events, economy, Education, free market, Politics, republican, Rights, Ron Paul | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

Get to know the economy with this list of articles.

Posted by Jesse on September 29, 2008

The Recession Reader

Instead of looking to the mainstream for answers to this crisis, why not look to those who saw it coming?

The Bailout Reader

It’s never been more important to spread a sound view of money and banking, not only as a protection against the fallacies of “stabilization” and “reflation” but also as way to see what kind of reforms are essential now.

Posted in antiwar, Constitution, Current Events, economy, Education, free market, Politics, republican, Rights, Ron Paul | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »