Category: Politics, Power, and Governance

  • I love honest liberals. They tend to be the sentimental ones. It’s the intellect

    I love honest liberals.

    They tend to be the sentimental ones.

    It’s the intellectuals who are dishonest.

    And they have to be. Fundamentally leftism is kleptocratic. It’s thievery.

    But it’s pretty hard to chastise civil people who simply want to take care of everyone.

    I just don’t want them to empower their intellectuals. Who are, in a word, crooks.


    Source date (UTC): 2012-09-24 22:43:00 UTC

  • ARE PEOPLE LEAVING CALIFORNIA “The Great California Exodus” 1) Density. People f

    http://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/cr_71.htm#.UGD1C_E-us0WHY ARE PEOPLE LEAVING CALIFORNIA

    “The Great California Exodus”

    1) Density. People flee density. Despite the desires of urban planners.

    2) Unemployment. People flee to opportunities.

    3) Uncertainty: The government cannot provide essential services, and tax hikes are imminent.

    They forgot: 4) LA is a few points of pretty amidst a sprawling slum.


    Source date (UTC): 2012-09-24 20:11:00 UTC

  • LEFT = LAWS : Redistribute income RIGHT = NORMS : Redistribute norms LIBERTARIAN

    LEFT = LAWS : Redistribute income

    RIGHT = NORMS : Redistribute norms

    LIBERTARIAN = PROPERTY : Redistribute liberty


    Source date (UTC): 2012-09-24 20:02:00 UTC

  • ON WAR AS ORGANIZED MURDER (A post from elsewhere) It may be true that war is or

    ON WAR AS ORGANIZED MURDER

    (A post from elsewhere)

    It may be true that war is organized murder, But that moral statement must be balanced by the practical recognition that those who are unwilling to engage in war, unprepared for it, and unskilled in it, will rapidly become the subjects of those who are willing, prepared, and skilled at conducting it.

    Certainly the neocon mission has been a failure in muslim lands, for the sole reason that exacting punishment for not controlling one’s citizens is different from the absurd attempt at social conversion of paternalistic tribalism to something like democracy and consumer capitalism.

    Certainly the intervention in Serbia was a mistake. Wars can be waged by urgent violence, tactical trade policy, ideological conversion, and sustained immigration. To limit the appropriation of a people’s life and property to that of violence is a bit of arbitrary and dishonest rhetorical trickery. Conquest by immigration is just as viable as conquest by force. The only difference is the time frame.

    Certainly the US intervention into WW! was a mistake, as was our intervention in the european theater in ww2. The cultural core of Europe was Germany and we broke her will. And along with that will, the long term viability of the high-trust society that is unique to protestant germanic lands and the secret of Germanic resistance to corruption. The rest of Europe is just a cultural province by comparison. And teh german criticism of petty consumerism of anglo society has proven as true as they predicted. It will be two or three generations before she regains her will to act as the core cultural state of western civilization. (Others think it will not recover but I’m less skeptical)

    But I don’t think our interventions that stopped the spread of communism were mistakes. I don’t think McArthur’s desire to topple communist china was a mistake. It would have saved millions of lives, and prevented the upcoming confrontation we will all be faced with.

    And most of all, I don’t respect european pacifism paid for with american blood and treasure. Nor social programs that are subsidized by Americans who pay for European defense, and most importantly, subsidy of stable energy prices. Nor do I respect American pacifism that is mere financial and personal convenience masquerading as conviction.

    There is a vast difference between war, nation building, police action, and empire building. Only war is necessary. Nation building, police action and empire building are just thefts by way of murder.


    Source date (UTC): 2012-09-23 14:08:00 UTC

  • FROM A POST ON QUORA – THE IMPOSSIBILITY OF MAJORITY RULE OVER HETEROGENEOUS VAL

    FROM A POST ON QUORA – THE IMPOSSIBILITY OF MAJORITY RULE OVER HETEROGENEOUS VALUE SYSTEMS

    Small homogenous cultures tend to be redistributive. One of the sillly myths, is that 350M americans of various value systems can be governed as are 10M northern european protestant germanics. Majority rule assists us in selecting fiscal priorities when our interests and values are the same. But as the values of a country become heterogeneous through immigration, or the breakdown of the nuclear family that allows women to return to their communal state of bearing children but asking others to pay for them, we render majority rule impossible. Because now we are not selecting priorities for the use of scarce resources, and generating laws to prevent privatization of those investment ‘commons’, but we are instead, generating laws to advance one system of moral codes at the expense of another, and using money from one group to achieve what is amoral to them. This is why democratic government is limited to homogenous cultural entities. And why the market serves us across heterogeneous entities. Our institutions of majority rule are not competent to solve this problem of heterogeneous values.


    Source date (UTC): 2012-09-22 13:11:00 UTC

  • I LOVE LIBERTARIANS Really. I mean. They’re interesting. And they aren’t interes

    I LOVE LIBERTARIANS

    Really. I mean. They’re interesting. And they aren’t interesting at someone else’s expense.

    Libertarians and progressives are closer than libertarians and conservatives. Both are more attracted to new experiences. But libertarians desire experiences that they can create voluntarily. Liberals desire experiences whether obtained voluntarily or not. The difference between these world views is caused by the difference in false consensus bias. Libertarians don’t make that error. Progressives are defined by it.


    Source date (UTC): 2012-09-19 15:26:00 UTC

  • GENIUS: THE STATE’S MEANS OF GAINING SUPPORT (from Stephan Kinsella)

    http://www.stephankinsella.com/2010/02/swinkels-and-hoppe-on-the-tacit-support-of-the-state/HOPPE’S GENIUS: THE STATE’S MEANS OF GAINING SUPPORT

    (from Stephan Kinsella)


    Source date (UTC): 2012-09-19 12:35:00 UTC

  • LIBERTARIANISM AND INSTITUTIONS The mysterious criticism that libertarians decry

    LIBERTARIANISM AND INSTITUTIONS

    The mysterious criticism that libertarians decry all institutions is a false one. And if it were true, it would be self contradictory. Property is an institution, even if only an informal one. One cannot both argue that institutions are unnecessary, or universally malicious when property itself is an institution.

    And morals are institutions too, even if they are all, in the final analysis derivations of the institution of property as it is implemented by different groups. This fact helps us understand why some moral codes are superior to others: private, several property both allows more calculation of opportunities, and provides the incentive to act upon them

    Formal institutions are not contrary to liberty. Tribal leaders who resolve conflicts, and independent judges are institutions. A code of common law is an institution. A network of banks, and the practice of interest are institutions And perhaps the least intuitive to westerners who live within these institutions, the informal institution of objective truth, its implementation as truth telling, as well as the institution of ethical universalism by which we forgo opportunities to benefit self, family, and tribe, and restrict ourselves to actions that can be subject to the market – a counter-intuitive concept which we live every day, is the source of the germanic west’s limited corruption by comparison to other cultures. And the realization that our ethics is governed by the market rather than self, family or tribe, is alien to westerners who cannot conceive of any alternative way of thinking.

    If a group of people create a homeowners association, or found a new city, o even a new country, as long as they deprive no one else of property, either directly or indirectly by doing so, even if the formation of a such a contract is one to which all members and their guests and progeny must adhere, is not a violation of liberty. Even if they, like shopping mall owners, require that visitors and new members abide by that contract.

    These are all forms of institutions. So, institutions are not prohibited by the desire for liberty. It is not institutions themselves that eradicate liberty, since liberty is the result of the institution of property. It is human beings functioning within a bureaucracy that comprises an institution that eradicates liberty. Bureaucracies must of necessity, out of a lack of choice, act for the purpose of perpetuating the institution itself, or for the purpose of simplifying the job of its members. And both self perpetuation and self service are caused by the monopoly power granted to these institutions, when they are insulated from competition.

    Because while rules are abstractions which of themselves have no self interest to express, people are real things, and in the midst of complexity, have no cognitive choice but to rely upon simple rules of thumb, instinct, self interest and moral judgement.

    And those moral judgements, because of genetic necessity, vary. To argue otherwise is simply advocating totalitarian eugenics, while making the error that we are in fact materially equal, rather than equal in our right to property. That is, by the extension of enfranchisement to the lower classes, those with alternative allocations of property rights, those with habits of familialism and tribalism, and in particular, with the addition of women to the pool of voters and to the market for consumption, production and trade, – for whom males possess a polar reproductives strategy, all have quite different moral codes. Ad those moral codes are a gene expression. We have given those with alternative moral codes, the freedom to alter the western definitions of property rights to favor their preferred method of gene expression. And the more natural one. Aristocracy, that is, meritocracy, is a rarity. Just as are truth telling, and universalism.

    Bureaucracy was created to enforce homogeneity. And we are no longer homogenous. Any bureaucratic institution that exists to create homogeneity is by definition immoral, and enforcing not just self service, but self service by forced involuntary transfer from some to others, which in turn violates not just our property rights but our genetic composition and rights of reproduction. Rather than a bureaucracy of homogeneity, the only rule a population needs is several, personal, property, and the means by which to resolve conflicts over its transfer, and the willingness of some individuals to use their capacity for violence to maintain that right to personal property.

    So it is bureaucracy that is the threat to our freedom. When we criticize government broadly, we are making a mistake that confuses people outside the movement. A government is a set of institutions that assist people in cooperating in a division of knowledge and labor. It is the institutions that allow us to express and make use of the institution of property. As such a government is not necessarily bad, as Rothbard’s diasporic voluntarism, and Hoppe’s private government have show us. Is not government in the abstract then that is systemically corrupting of man. It is the abrogation of property rights and the very existence of a bureaucracy within a bureaucratic state that sap our liberty and all that follows from it.

    -Curt


    Source date (UTC): 2012-09-14 20:40:00 UTC

  • Catalans rally for secession. One can only hope

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-09-12/thousands-turn-out-for-autonomy-rally-in-barcelona/4256036SECESSION

    Catalans rally for secession.

    One can only hope….


    Source date (UTC): 2012-09-13 19:18:00 UTC

  • POLITICS IS SHOW BUSINESS FOR UGLY PEOPLE Priceless. 🙂

    POLITICS IS SHOW BUSINESS FOR UGLY PEOPLE

    Priceless. 🙂


    Source date (UTC): 2012-09-11 19:14:00 UTC