Tag: Not So Crazy Libertarian Ideals

What About the Roads

In libertarian circles the phrase, “What about the roads?” has become a favorite when mocking statists. Statists believe that the government brought roads to humanity in the same way the Greek believed Prometheus brought fire. It is their belief that without the state there would be no roads so this story my be heresy:

Their livelihood was being threatened, and they were tired of waiting for government help, so business owners and residents on Hawaii’s Kauai island pulled together and completed a $4 million repair job to a state park — for free.

[…]

And if the repairs weren’t made, some business owners faced the possibility of having to shut down.

Ivan Slack, co-owner of Napali Kayak, said his company relies solely on revenue from kayak tours and needs the state park to be open to operate. The company jumped in and donated resources because it knew that without the repairs, Napali Kayak would be in financial trouble.

“If the park is not open, it would be extreme for us, to say the least,” he said. “Bankruptcy would be imminent. How many years can you be expected to continue operating, owning 15-passenger vans, $2 million in insurance and a staff? For us, it was crucial, and our survival was dependent on it. That park is the key to the sheer survival of the business.”

So Slack, other business owners and residents made the decision not to sit on their hands and wait for state money that many expected would never come. Instead, they pulled together machinery and manpower and hit the ground running March 23. Watch the volunteers repairing the road »

And after only eight days, all of the repairs were done, Pleas said. It was a shockingly quick fix to a problem that may have taken much longer if they waited for state money to funnel in.

Once again those evil capitalists stepped in and helped people. While the state claimed repairing the road would require $4 million, a massive sum they didn’t have available, business owners facing bankruptcy decided to move in and fix the roads necessary to get customers to the business. This also demonstrates one of many possible ways transportation can be provided without the state.

What good is a business if customers can’t get to it? None. Businesses need to have a means for customers to get from their homes to the places of business. Even Internet based businesses like Amazon require infrastructure to get their goods from warehouses to customers’ homes. The bottom line is transportation is needed for commerce so it’s in the best interests of businesses to ensure proper infrastructure exists.

Most people get caught up in a vicious cycle where they believe things are done the way they are done because that is the only way they can be done. Entrepreneurs are different, they see the way things are currently done as inefficient or ineffective and work to provide them better. This is why the free market works, innovators see a need and try to fulfill that need. Sometimes they are wrong and end up going broke but other times they are successful and are rewarded for their efforts by customers.

Roads are no different than any other good or service, they can be provided by any individual or group of individuals. The key difference is that, unlike the state, the reward individuals receive is based on how well they provide a good or service. If the good or service they provide is done so inefficiently then another entrepreneur will move in and provide it more efficiently. If the good or service they provide is unwanted by consumers then they go broke. When the state provides an inefficient servie the people are forced to pay for it regardless and no hope of competition exists in most cases. We get caught in a vicious cycle of being provided shitty goods and services while also being force fed the idea that the good and service can only be provided by the state, that the market is incapable of such a feat.

The Most Important Election of Our Lifetime

Many people, especially gun rights advocates, are starting to parrot the familiar phrase that this election is the most important election of our lifetime. I think this blog nailed it:

Take a breath. This is not the most important election of your lifetime. Every election is the same, and it is an airtight bet that each new president is going to be worse than his precedessor. Bamboozled voters sprint to the polls every four years, and appropriately utter the same line beggars use: “Gimme some change, gimme some change!” And like those unfortunate beggars (who also don’t see their fortunes change), each time they are left holding an empty cup.

I’m 29 and this will be the third election cycle I’ve had to experience. All three elections have been labeled as the most important election of my lifetime and nothing has changed after any of them. Although I missed being of voting age by one year when Bush was running against Gore I remember all the talk about how that election was the most important election gun owners had ever experienced. Then when Bush was running against Kerry it was the most important election of my lifetime because Kerry would take my guns. When it was McCain against Obama is was yet again the most important election of my lifetime because Obama was a gun grabbing socialist. Now I’m being told that this is the most important election of my lifetime because Obama will be free of having to worry about reelection and be in a position to potentially nominate two Supreme Court justices.

If every election I’ve experienced has been the most important one of my lifetime then unimportant elections must be extremely nonevents. Let’s face facts, nothing has changed in the last three elections (or any elections before that, but I wasn’t paying any attention to the political arena at those times so I’ll refrain from further comment). Bush didn’t change anything for the two terms he was in office and Obama hasn’t changed anything for the one term he’s been in office. Neither Obama or Romney is likely to change anything either. The bottom line is the state’s violence continues to be wielded against the people of the world. While the police state expands here at home foreign countries are being invaded and occupied.

This isn’t the most important election of your lifetime, no election has every actually been important. Honestly, I would say this is the least important election of your lifetime because with each election the state’s power grows and as it grows elections become even more meaningless (if that’s even possible).

Those Evil Capitalists

That evil capitalist company Apple has really gone and done it this time:

Apple Inc and its key supplier Foxconn Technology Group will share the initial costs of improving labor conditions at the Chinese factories that assemble iPhones and iPads, Foxconn’s top executive said on Thursday.

Foxconn chief Terry Gou did not give a figure for the costs, but the group has been spending heavily to fight a perception its vast plants in China are sweatshops with poor conditions for its million-strong labor force. It regards the criticism as unfair.

“We’ve discovered that this (improving factory conditions) is not a cost. It is a competitive strength,” Gou told reporters on Thursday after the ground-breaking ceremony for a new China headquarters in Shanghai.

“I believe Apple sees this as a competitive strength along with us, and so we will split the initial costs.”

Apple is going to foot a portion of the costs required to improve the working conditions at Foxconn. While I point to this as a demonstration of capitalism others are quick to point out that Apple is only doing this out of self-interest. These people claim the only reason Apple is working to improve the conditions at Foxconn is to improve their image in the eyes of the world. And you know what? Those people are right.

One of the primary differences between capitalism and socialism is that capitalism relies on individuals’ self-interest while socialism relies on individuals’ altruism. In general humans are like any other animal, we’re interested in what’s best for us. What advocates of socialism miss is the fact that self-interest, in a society, usually means mutual benefit. Apple is the perfect case. Their customers have been noting their unhappiness with the conditions at Foxconn so Apple has moved to improve its image by improving the working conditions at Foxconn. Unhappy customers often aren’t repeat customers and when you’re a business you want as many repeat customers as you can get.

Ludwig von Mises defined the action axiom as, “purposeful behavior. Or we may say: Action is will put into operation and transformed into an agency, is aiming at ends and goals, is the ego’s meaningful response to stimuli and to the conditions of its environment, is a person’s conscious adjustment to the state of the universe that determines his life. Such paraphrases may clarify the definition given and prevent possible misinterpretations. But the definition itself is adequate and does not need complement of commentary.” Humans act to alleviate discomfort. When you’re hungry you eat, when you’re thirsty you drink, when you need to tell the time you buy a wristwatch, when your neighbor’s plight causes you unease you help them, etc. In the case of a business man action often comes from making his customers happier. His customers’ needs is the motivating factor in providing goods and services because it is through the providing of those goods and services that the business man is able to enrich himself.

Don’t think of an act performed out of self-interested as bad because all acts are ultimately performed out of self-interest. Self-interest can be a bad thing when one chooses force to attain their goals but when one chooses the easier way, the way of trade, self-interest becomes a beautiful thing that improves the lives of all involved.

Brining Hope and Change Again

Obama is running on his hope and change platform again. He hopes that people will just forget about his last four years of stomping the gas pedal to tyranny and accept him as a freedom loving president who supports the rights of individuals. When his campaign is having protesters arrested that message becomes a bit more difficult to swallow:

Though the NATO summit won’t officially begin until later this week, police have already ramped up their presence in downtown Chicago and, on Monday morning, they made a number of arrests at President Obama’s campaign headquarters.

After a group of demonstrators rushed into Prudential Plaza, the building where Obama’s re-election campaign is based, eight protesters were led away in handcuffs when they refused to leave the building’s lobby, the Chicago Tribune reports. Police said the arrested demonstrators would likely be charged with criminal trespass.

The group was organized by the Catholic Worker movement and, according to Fox Chicago, was attempting to open up a dialogue around ending the U.S. occupation in Afghanistan. The action is part of what activists are calling a “week without capitalism.”

While those protesters may never get their wish of ending the occupation of Afghanistan at least they’re getting their goal of a week without capitalism. As I’ve explains the only alternative to capitalism is force. Instead of mutually beneficial relationships built upon voluntary trade those protesters are getting a taste of the alternative, the force of the state, and they don’t seem to be enjoying it.

Capitalism is a beautiful system that achieves mutual benefit by relying on self-interest. People are compelled to help each other because by doing so they are also helping themselves. If you make shoes and you need bread then you and the baker can make a mutually beneficial trade, shoes for bread. Those who perform the job of satisfying fellow individuals are rewarded so they may expand their operations and satisfy even more individuals’ needs. Capitalism stands as a stark opposition to the state’s violence where mutual benefit doesn’t arise because one party, the state, steals from the other party. Instead of mutual cooperation you have threats and acts of violence.

You want a world without capitalism? Good news, we already have it and it’s called the state. There is no need to protest or demonstrate because that goal has already been achieved. Instead of entering voluntary agreements with your fellow people you now have great portions of your wealth stolen from you so that it may be redistributed to those in the state’s favor. No need to trade for the people of Afghanistan exists because the United States government is there forcefully taking the desirable natural resources. Do you know what the best part is? You don’t have to limit yourself to a week without capitalism, you get to suffer your entire life without capitalism. Congratulations, your deepest desires have been fulfilled.

The Result of Attempting to Control the Economy

France is famous for Paris, wine, and interfering with business. If you wanted to start a business in France I would call you insane because the French government will punish you for daring to bring a little prosperity to their country. Some of the laws France has on the books are downright stupid but it’s good to see business owners have found ways around them:

Here’s a curious fact about the French economy: The country has 2.4 times as many companies with 49 employees as with 50. What difference does one employee make? Plenty, according to the French labor code. Once a company has at least 50 employees inside France, management must create three worker councils, introduce profit sharing, and submit restructuring plans to the councils if the company decides to fire workers for economic reasons.

French businesspeople often skirt these restraints by creating new companies rather than expanding existing ones. “I can’t tell you how many times when I was Minister I’d meet an entrepreneur who would tell me about his companies,” Thierry Breton, chief executive officer of consulting firm Atos and Minister of Finance from 2005 to 2007, said at a Paris conference on April 4. “I’d ask, ‘Why companies?’ He’d say, ‘Oh, I have several so that I can keep [the workforce] under 50.’ We have to review our labor code.”

If you’re a business owner and hire more than 50 employees you’re suddenly in for a world of hurt. Thankfully France hasn’t made it illegal for individuals to own more than one company although I’m sure such a law will be in the works soon since these “exploits” are being brought to life. Such a ban would be entirely pointless since business owners would find another way around the new law but it makes entrepreneurs less willing to start new businesses and therefore the economy continues to suffer greatly.

Prohibition Against Illegal Aliens Owning Firearms Upheld

Via Shall Not Be Questioned I learned that the 10th Circuit Court upheld the prohibition on illegal aliens owning firearms.

There isn’t much to say about this ruling beyond the fact it’s bullshit. Once again I travel astray from the common path many gun rights actives follow since I don’t believe any right is something granted by the state. If you are a human being you are a self-owner and as a self-owner you have a right to trade your labor for whatever mechanization you desire and defend yourself. This necessarily means you have a right to purchase a firearm and use it for your own protection regardless of your status as a citizen. In fact allowing the state to rule on rights is always dangerous because it sets a precedence that they hold domain over determine what that right entails and they will always rule in favor of themselves.

For some odd reason many gun rights activists hold the idea that illegal aliens should be prohibited from owning and carrying firearms. I find this strange because many of these very same gun rights activists claim gun ownership is a natural right. Let’s take a look at what a natural right is:

Natural rights are rights not contingent upon the laws, customs, or beliefs of any particular culture or government, and therefore universal and inalienable. In contrast, legal rights are those bestowed onto a person by the law of a particular political and legal system, and therefore relative to specific cultures and governments.

Natural rights, of which I would argue only one exists, are inalienable. The one inalienable right individuals hold is the right of self-ownership. One cannot trade ownership of self to another as ownership because one cannot grant control of themselves to others. Even in a state of slavery you have free will and may refuse to obey your master or even go so far as to rebel. As you hold exclusive ownership over yourself you have a right to defend yourself and use the product of your labor as you choose.

If you believe gun ownership can be restricted by the state in any way then you believe it is a legal right. I personally believe the right of gun ownership is nothing more than an extension of self-ownership since you trade your labor for the firearm. Because of this I don’t believe anybody can be prohibited from owning a firearm. Those who agree with this court decision must also agree that gun ownership isn’t a natural right but a privilege bestowed by the state.

I’m Now an Ordained Minister

North Carolina voted to ban gay marriage yesterday and the same item will be on November’s ballot here in Minnesota. I can’t help the people of North Carolina but I can do something in my own state.

I’m now an ordained minister of the Universal Life Church Monastery. When my credentials arrive I’m going to apply for my permit to perform marriages in Minnesota. Why am I doing this? Because the state has decided it has a right to define voluntary association and it’s about time some civil disobedience was done to give the state a giant middle finger.

I will perform straight, gay, polygamous, supernatural, and even self marriages (who could possibly love you more than you). Furthermore I am willing to observe and religious tradition you choose including christianity, judaism, islam, paganism, neo-paganism, asatru, or a complete lack of religious connotations if you so desire. Once married I leave it up to you to file your taxes under the status of “married.” If any questions are asked I’ll gladly vouch for the validity of your marriage.

Just because a larger group votes in favor of banning a form of voluntary association than the group that voted against banning it doesn’t mean the ban should be obeyed. As Martin Luther King Jr. said, “One has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws.” If Minnesota votes to prohibit gay marriage give me a call and I’ll perform the ceremony for free. On the other hand if the state doesn’t vote to prohibit gay marriage I’ll still perform the ceremony and those wanting prohibited forms of marriage can still call me for a free ceremony.

The Game

People often ask me, “Chris, if you don’t believe we can change things politically why do you even talk about politics?” The answer is simple, politics is my sick form of amusement. Politics is nothing more than a sport in my opinion and in this sport there are spectators, commentators, players, and coaches. The spectators are your average people who merely watch the game and cheer by otherwise have no power to change the outcome. Commentators are the people who talk about what is happening, explain the players’ strategies, and otherwise help the spectators understand what’s happening. Politicians are the players and lobbyists are the coaches.

I play the part of commentator. Beyond explaining how the game is player I also explain what is or has recently happened. Like the spectators I have no actual power to affect the game but enjoy observing it and talking about it.

The spectators generally know the rules of the game by heart but know nothing of the nuances. They know that a bill must pass the Senate and House then be signed by the president but don’t understand all the lobbying and cronyism that goes on behind closed doors instead relying on commentators to explain those parts. While there are a vast number of teams playing this sport spectators generally have a very binary view of things. They only see the game as “their team” versus “the other team.” “Their team” is one the left or right side of the field while “the other team” is on the opposite side of the field. What about the other fields? Entirely forgotten unless “their team” is playing an away game there. Most of these spectators hold a great deal of superstition regarding games and believe their performance of certain rituals, like voting, can actually change the outcome of the game. No matter how many times you explain their wearing a specific red hat or jersey has no affect on the outcome of the game they refuse to believe you.

Coaches are the ones who call the shots. They train the players and develop the strategies but don’t physically play the game. Lobbyists and other cronies are the ones who tell the politicians what “the spectators” want and give them the strategies to achieve those desires. When an automobile manufacturer crony approaches a politician with a bill designed to shut out the manufacturer’s competition they will tell the politician how to sell it to the public. The crony will explain that the bill is for improving the environment and ignores the fact that implementing the bill’s demands is extremely expensive and therefore will cause smaller competitors to go out of business. Taking the crony’s advice the politicians being to play the actual game, selling the spectators what they want to see.

Each team promises to deliver its fans what they want. Fans of the “left” generally want the “right” to fail. When a player for the “left” says the fans want higher taxes on the wealth the “left’s” fans begin demanding higher taxes on the wealth. The “right” tells its fans to oppose higher taxes on the wealthy so the “right’s” fans begin vehemently opposing higher taxes on the wealthy. Whether the “left” wins or the “right” wins is irrelevant because nothing will negatively affect the wealthy, yet the spectators will feel as though they received a glorious victory or a horrendous defeat. Either way the spectators keep buying tickets and watching the game while the coaches and players become insanely wealthy.

That’s what politics is, a game. You can play any part if you really want to but ultimately the only people who matter are the players and coaches. That is until you realize that the game can no longer be played if the spectators stop showing up and giving the game legitimacy. Nothing will change regardless of what team wins, the only winning move is not to play.