Libertarianism

Under the Skin of A Ferengi

This entry was posted in Libertarianism on by

Max, in commenting on the award of the Nobel Prize in Economics, praises Ned Phelps thusly:

People sometimes call me old school; Phelps is the old school of the old school. Unlike Prescott and Kydland, an ordinary mortal can engage Phelps’ work. Unlike some Ferengi-like libertarians, there is a rich current of humanism in it. There are all sorts of provocative things to argue about.

Which made me wonder who would be a Ferengi-like libertarian. Unfortunately Max does not give any examples so let’s briefly explore the idea.

Here’s a few of the Ferengi Rules of Acquisition:

1. Once you have their money, never give it back

14. Anything stolen is pure profit

29. When someone says “It’s not the money,” they’re lying

34. War is good for business

51. Never admit a mistake if there’s someone else to blame

61. Never buy what can be stolen

164. Never spend your own money when you can spend someone else’s

172. If you can sell it, don’t hesitate to steal it

Leading to the conclusion that Ferengi-like folks would be embezzlers, thieves, war profiteers, rent seekers and so on.

Here is libertarianism in short:

Libertarianism is a political philosophy advocating that individuals should be free to do whatever they wish with their person or property, as long as they do not infringe on the same liberty of others. Libertarians hold as a fundamental maxim that all human interaction should be voluntary and consensual. They maintain that the initiation (or threat) of physical force against another person or his property, or the commission of fraud, is a violation of that principle.

Ferengi-like libertarians is a contradiction in terms.

Peel the skin off any so-called Ferengi-like libertarian and you will not find a libertarian but some variant of a statist trying to get something for nothing; some congress critter or policy wonk who thinks they know better what to do with what you have earned and how you should live your life than you do.

On the other hand the terms Ferengi-like liberals, conservatives, democrats, republicans are not at all self contradictory. I’m not saying that everyone in these groups is Ferengi-like rather that being Ferengi-like would not disqualify someone from membership in one of these groups whereas being Ferengi-like does disqualify someone from being a libertarian or, for that matter, being a member of most schools of anarchism.

A quick look at the Ferengi Rules of Acquisition leads to the conclusion that Ferengi-like folks would be thieves, embezzlers, rent seekers and so on. Comparing this to the characteristics of libertarians it is easy to determine that the phrase Ferengi-like libertarians is a contradiction in terms.

Peel the skin off any so-called Ferengi-like libertarian and you will find not a libertarian but some variant of a statist trying to get something for nothing; some congress critter or policy wonk who thinks they know better what to do with what you have earned than you do.

The terms Ferengi-like liberals, conservatives, democrats, republicans are not at all self contradictory. This is not to say that everyone in these groups is Ferengi-like but rather that being Ferengi-like would not disqualify someone from membership in one of these groups whereas being Ferengi-like does disqualify someone from being a libertarian or, for that matter, being a member of most schools of anarchism.

The american taliban Expands Its Reach

This entry was posted in Anarchism Government Law Enforcement Libertarianism on by

The us congress has passed legislation which prohibits US banking institutions from processing credit card and funds transfer transactions by once free residents of the United States with internet gambling companies.
dictator bush is expected to sign the legislation.
Much gambling is pretty much a waste of money if not outright theft and I don’t participate in any kind of internet gambling and don’t anticipate doing so. However, free people make their own choices.
Governments, if they have any role at all, protect free people from those who would physically harm them, defraud them, steal from them, etc. They do this by demonstrating in an open court that some person or business has performed one of these acts and they assure that proper restitution is made.
Does anyone else expect the stock of British and other international banks to rise a bit as folks move some of their money to foreign banks which the us governement can not control?
I think I’ll open a British account and start using it for some of my infrequent debit/credit card transactions (I use cash for most of my in person purchasing). Does anyone have guidance on how to open an overseas account?

The way things are going financial diversification may become even more important.

In The Early Hours

This entry was posted in al Qaeda Anarchism bush administration cheney Libertarianism War on Terrorism on by

Yesterday g w bush said:

So their answer is to deny people this choice by raging against the forces of freedom and moderation. This struggle has been called a clash of civilizations. In truth, it is a struggle for civilization. We are fighting to maintain the way of life enjoyed by free nations. And we’re fighting for the possibility that good and decent people across the Middle East can raise up societies based on freedom and tolerance and personal dignity.

We are now in the early hours of this struggle between tyranny and freedom.

He is so right and so wrong.

Yes, we are in the early hours of the fight for freedom and liberty, the early hours of the struggle for civilization.

It is not, though, a fight between the United States and al Quaeda or the United States and some phantom called Islamofascism or the United States and the concept of terrorism.

It is a fight between people throughout the world and those individuals or groups who would use force to achieve their ends. These latter, be they street corner thugs or state actors are our enemy.

  • This war will not be over until suicide bombers are a distant memory.
  • It will not be over until large standing armies are a distant memory.
  • It will not be over until people throughout the world can voluntarily exchange goods and services without interference.
  • It will not be over until people throughout the world can voluntarily choose their relationships.
  • It will not be over until, well, this list can be much longer but that will be for a manifesto.

May it be over soon.

Solving New Orlean’s Murder Problem

This entry was posted in Anarchism Drug Laws Government Law Enforcement Libertarianism on by

Yesterday afternoon NPR presented a lengthy story on murder in present day New Orleans:

New Orleans’ murder rate is as high as it was in July 2005, but the city’s homicide squad employs one-quarter the staff it had before Katrina. Day or night, working conditions are beyond difficult.

Early in the piece the reporter noted that many think that the high murder rate, nearly double that of pre-Katrina New Orleans, is due to strife between gangs over drug sales turf. This may be true and midway through the piece one police officer is interviewed who very explicity describes the battles going on over various street corners. Yet of all the murders that are reported in the story only one closes with its cause: a 15 year old boy is killed by someone who thinks he stole his FEMA money.

Not drugs but Fema money.

However, if the good folks in New Orleans would like to dramatically reduce, if not eliminate, the drug turf murders and mayhem they can do so easily: legalize the sale and use of currenly illegal drugs. There are few murders over the marketing and sale of goods and services that are not suppressed by governments.

So, New Orleans, solve your drug related murder problem. Reject the failed war on drugs.

Causus Toss’m Out

This entry was posted in Anarchism Drug Laws Government Law Enforcement Libertarianism on by

There are reason’s a plenty to toss out the current us federal office holders, all of them, and most of the domestic reasons get lost behind the bloody headlines of democracy’s international warfare.
Radley Balko at The Agitator provides near daily, oft multiple times a day, examples of federal, state and local government representatives abusing individuals, families and associations of individuals.
Asset forfeiture llegislation is a particularly heinous weapon in the government arsonal of extortion and theft tools and today Balko highlites a particularly onerous use of asset forfeiture:

The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that police may keep the $124,700 they seized from Emiliano Gonzolez, an immigrant who by all appearances was attempting to use the money to start a legitimate business.
This is an outrageous ruling. Consider:
# Gonzolez was never charged with any crime in relation to the money, much less convicted.
# Gonzalez had an explanation for the money that a lower court found both “plausible” and “consistent.” He brought several witnesses forward to corroborate his story (in the preposterous land of asset forfeiture, property can be guilty of a crime, and the burden is often person the police seized the property from to prove he obtained it legally).
# The government offered no evidence to counter Gonzolez’s explanation.
Instead, the court ruled that the mere fact that Gonzolez was carrying a large sum of money, that he had difficulty understanding the officer’s questions, that he incorrectly answered some of those questions (due, Gonzolez says, to fears that if police knew he was carrying that much money, they might confiscate it — imagine that!), and that a drug dog alerted to the car Gonzolez was driving (which, as dissenting judge Donald Lay noted, was a rental, likely driven by dozens of people before Gonzolez), was enough to “convict” the money of having drug ties, even if there wasn’t enough evidence to charge Gonzolez.

Read the rest of the post and Balko has the link to the opinion.

Yep, part and parcel of the immoral war on drugs which is itself plenty of reason to convict every participant of crimes against humanity.