Over a period of decades, there have been political candidates and politicians that have campaigned at the federal level that have promised that if they were elected into office that they would “reform Washington,” only to discover that it is they who are reformed by going native, succumbing the D.C. culture and its way of doing things. It has become increasingly clear that if reform is going to take place, it would have to come through the people and through their elected representatives in the state legislatures in all fifty states. Under Article V of the U.S. Constitution, with the help of two-thirds of the states, a convention can be called for the purposes of introducing new amendments to the Constitution. Three-fourths of the states would be required to ratify them. If one state can get the ball rolling, I believe that other states would follow.
There are many progressives in the media, in academia, in politics and elsewhere that have this belief that for the good of society and for the good of the nation, one must surrender his or her liberties and rights for “the common good.” That one must surrender one’s right to own and have property for “the common good;” that one must surrender his or her privacy for “the common good;” that one must surrender his or her conscience, speech and thoughts for “the common good;” and that one must surrender his or her own individuality, being and body for the so called “common good.”
New Jersey Governor Chris Christie recently stated in an interview that there is a strand of libertarianism that is in both the Democratic and Republican parties that he finds repugnant and “dangerous” when it comes to foreign and domestic policy. In the same interview, he attacked libertarian politicians like Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) and others both personally and professionally.
On foreign affairs, Mr. Christie believes that it is justified to have U.S, troops stationed in 140 countries for the sole purpose of sending them into battle in wars and conflicts that are not in U.S. interests. He further believes that it is the duty of the U.S. to be the world’s policeman. Mr. Christie agrees with Neo-Conservatives like William Kristol and Charles Krauthammer that the U.S. must follow the foreign policy of Woodrow Wilson to make the world safe for democracy no matter where. Libertarians believe the opposite. They are of the belief that wars should only occur when a nation is attacked or threatened. Furthermore, while they believe that all nations of the world should be free and prosperous, they are the well wishers of their own nation. They also believe that the U.S. should stay out of the affairs of other nations both internally and externally.
Tent City is a voluntary institution that exists as the result of local supporters and mutual aid, saving the taxpayers 1-2 million dollars a year! It is a perfect example of how more can be accomplished on a voluntary nickel than on a dollar that has been stolen from the taxpayers by the corrupt and inefficient racket called the Welfare State! The government here has done nothing to help the homeless, and everything that it could think of to try to shut this place down... The film covers the personal stories of several individuals, as well as the never-ending harassment from the local government.
Destiny's Bridge is an authentic look into the lives of otherwise-homeless individuals living in a little village of about 100 tents and shanties - a homestead that has been built on "public" woodland over the past 7-8 years. This film will be particularly enjoyable to people interested in off-the-grid living, agorism / homesteading, the small house movement, government corruption, protests / civil disobedience, and voluntary charity. It also explores some very complex issues, like the underlying causes of homelessness in America, artificial scarcity, sustainable living, personal responsibility, addiction, love, hope and despair.
Recently at a gathering in Rome, Pope Francis stated that in order to help out the poor and the downtrodden, government must do more. While I admire the Pope’s adoration for the less fortunate and those at the bottom of the economic ladder, I believe that government assistance is the last thing that they need. After more than 70 years of the Welfare State, and the implementation of social programs designed to help the poor, the state has failed and, instead of helping the poor and the downtrodden, it has enslaved them, so much so that they consider it a lifestyle. They have become so dependent on the state to assist them in housing, food etc. that they do not want to be self-sufficient, moving up the latter and being independent. They have chosen to become slaves of government.
Most people will then ask me the following question: “If the state cannot help the poor and the downtrodden, then who can?” Here’s the answer: Churches, Synagogues, Non-Profits, Businesses, Institutions, Individuals and others. If given the opportunity, these entities not only can help out the poor and the downtrodden, but they can also teach the value and worth of being independent, having dignity and being free in a free society. Furthermore, they would be the teachers and helpers of the free market and upward mobility whereas the state cannot do that.
At this time, this viewpoint is not welcomed by most Americans. However, with the enormity of the national debt and with the enormity of trillions in unfunded liabilities to fund these social programs, this will be considered and it should be. I believe in the future that the help of the private sector will be more welcoming than the help of government and that the American people will be the better for it.
Rahm Emmanuel commented that one should never let a good crisis go to waste. He’s absolutely right. Success demands decisive action when opportunities arise..
This is exactly what the Left does after every tragic public shooting incident and what they are doing in the wake of Sandy Hook.
But the programs that gun control advocates advance do not make us safer; they just make us more vulnerable and more dependent upon government. However, that is exactly what these programs are really intended to accomplish - to make us ever more dependent upon government.
Keynes and Hayek portrayed in the Fight of the Century.
I was wondering. Should I refer to Ludwig von Mises as “von Mises”, instead of “Mises”? Should I change my name to Smiling von Dave?
We know that Keynes popularized an old blunder [one picked up by the Money Dis. crowd], one that was around for ages, the so called lack of Aggregate Demand. Say wrote his famous law to refute it, and I’m sure a little research will find it mentioned in the Stone Age cave drawings.
We’ve written many times about how wrong it is, in theory and reality. Now it’s time to see how Mises took care of it. Genius that he was, all he needed was one line to expose the key flaw in Keynes’s theory.
Unfortunately, when he wrote the one liner, he didn’t mention Keynes by name. He also wrote it in technical language, because he wasn’t addressing a lay crowd, but experienced economists. This may be why Mises’ argument is not well known. Luckily for our generation, and for mankind in general, Smiling von Dave is here to spell it all out.
Although a great number of libertarians are also secularists, there is still a great deal of wisdom to be gleaned for our cause in the pages of the Judeo-Christian scriptures. Beyond religious content, the Bible provides a timeless perspective on human nature and the human condition, which is unchanging.
Therefore, it seems fitting that, during this Easter and Passover season, we take a fresh look at what the ancient texts have to offer to us friends of limited government and private property.
The first lesson, which is often tough for libertarians to swallow, is that liberty is not necessarily a popular idea. From time immemorial, a great many people have been willing to trade essential liberty for the illusion of a strong ruler who is both a powerful protector and a benevolent caretaker.