Liberty

Early Lessons of Bunkerville

0

 

Source: https://www.lewrockwell.com

By

Early Lessons of Bunkerville

 

The rush and rapidity of events in Bunkerville, Nevada surprised and cheered many, and there is a lot to learn from this case.

It’s too soon to know the long-term impact of people standing up against armed federales last week, but here are some early takeaways.

karen-head-shot-bench-264x300

Karen Kwiatkowski

Location matters.  This insurrection, brought on by federal government arrogance and greed, happened in part because people could get there, physically and intellectually.  Wide open rangeland (for hardy cattle and 100 year old turtles) physically and visually juxtaposed with the artificial stupidity of “free speech zones,” domesticated citizens penned in by red government tape, tell a story without words, history lessons, or politics.   The imagery brings to mind the words of one of my favorite heroes, “[T]he truth is, there is something terribly wrong with this country, isn’t there? Cruelty and injustice, intolerance and oppression. And where once you had the freedom to object, to think and speak as you saw fit, you now have censors and systems of surveillance coercing your conformity and soliciting your submission.”

Sifters like Drudge and Alex Jones are of enormous value in the struggle for human liberty.  I use Jeff Deist’s phraseology here because it is so perfect.  These market-driven and individualist information selectors, empowered by the low cost of the Internet and its associated technology, shared information in real time, live-streaming government actions and reactions, while providing the needed context of history, politics, economics, religion and culture, directly to people, not through their unions, their political parties, or their employers or their churches.  The search for the “truth” can be activated and shared across state lines and political party prejudice.  With timely information and honest context, government missteps and abuse can captivate and compel and even organize instant armies.

Sparks cause fires, and fires can radically change landscapes.  But the humble spark that invites sympathy may be more powerful than other even more deserving sparks.  Who doesn’t love family farmers, dogies on the range, and even a poor mistreated turtle?  The lockdown of Boston a year ago was highly offensive, illegal in any constitutional sense, and chock-full of federalized law enforcement excess and abuse.  Actual truth about every aspect of the backpack bombers has proven hard to get, to this day.  Yet, because the government abuse was presented as justified, and was delivered with shock and awe, it succeeded as a practice run for Any City, USA.  The thousands of innocent citizens in Boston who had their rights abused were also faceless and unsympathetic.  Apparently, no puppies or kittens were harmed during the collective violation of their owners.  Contrast this to what the feds did and intended to do to the Bundy family and their cows and calves.  Property lines mattered, the victims had faces, children and traditions, and innocent mothers, children and cattle were caught in the threatened crossfire.  The turtle situation also mattered, as news about how the government really treats endangered species boiled and bubbled across the Internet.  The favor-trading and rent-seeking of state and federal politicians and their financiers were also exposed.  The facts conspired to reveal the face of evil in the bland spineless government officials, in steely-eyed government snipers targeting unarmed Americans should they step out of line, in jackbooted government thugs and their machines itching for total dominance.

Simplicity is not 100% necessary in a spontaneous revolution, or any other kind.  The Bundy case is not legally simple, and it has been over twenty years in the making.  One could easily make the case, as the feds clearly rationalized, that the Bundys’ knew this was coming, they had to pay the demanded fines, and that public land is for public, re: “governmental” uses, as defined by whatever appropriate bureaucrat is in charge this decade, often as directed by bought-and-paid-for Senators and Congressmen.  Given how much of Nevada is already considered federal property, it wouldn’t have been unreasonable to expect that average Americans would agree with the government position.  Perhaps they did – but the tireless and fed up minority not only did not agree, because of the location, information and empathy, they showed up, like mushrooms after a spring rain, it must have seemed.  Mechanistic calculations failed the bureaucrats, and a certain spirit of shared spontaneous sacrifice of brothers and sisters prevailed.  Putting aside their own lives for the moment, and standing together, without violence but with an unusual and praiseworthy commitment to justice – this little army accomplished a great thing.  Was it just property rights defense, or a simple reaction to an ugly power grab by a bristling state security apparatus? Or was this fight many things to many people, all arriving at the same place and frame of mind from various religious, constitutional, political, economic and cultural perspectives and interpretations?

Location, broad access to real-time information, a humble sympathetic spark illuminating a multifaceted and even complex problem of justice – these four ingredients seemed present in Bunkerville.    Like the similar sounding Battle of Bunker Hill, the first battle of Bunkerville also illustrates that a weaker and inexperienced group opposed to tyranny can prevail against (or deliver a Pyrrhic victory to) the well-armed existent power structure. The BLM drawback will be publicly presented as a “good government” victory.  In fact the federales and the politicians are already busy with their post-game analysis.

In their analysis, I believe they will determine that, 1) location matters (and hence must be carefully selected and controlled); 2) information is a domestic battleground and if messages cannot be managed, then technology and access should be; 3) empathy must be created and controlled (either for the government position, or for some government-controlled and friendly vector) and; 4) a more effective surveillance state, with better “mood” research, citizen tracking and list-keeping must be created, in order to prevent future “losses” such as at Bunkerville last week.   Until we can shut down the printing presses at the Fed, the incessant borrowing, and the outrageous taxation in this troubled country, we cannot stop the state from more carefully choosing and hiding their mistreatment of citizens and their property.  We will be unable to reverse the pre-emptive criminalization of every person in the country that is the fundamental driving purpose of the surveillance state.

As with the British Army in 1775, the state’s institutions sow the seeds of their own destruction. Inflation, crushing debt, and rats leaving the sinking ship will conspire towards ultimate collapse.  As Bunkerville publicly demonstrated, we the people can peaceably help this process along.  The state will call it reform, transformation, or even rehabilitation, even as politicians begin to scramble to “lead” the leaders of this liberty and justice movement.   The state will shrink, in influence at first, as we have seen, then in physical presence, cohesiveness, and consumption.  We will call it victory, and tell our children instructive fables of evil statist monsters.  God bless the Bundys and their friends, and all of us.  It has started!


LRC columnist Karen Kwiatkowski, Ph.D. [send her mail], a retired USAF lieutenant colonel, blogs occasionally at Liberty and Power and The Beacon. To receive automatic announcements of new articles, click here or join her Facebook page. She ran for Congress in Virginia’s 6th district in 2012..

Copyright © 2014 Karen Kwiatkowski

Reprinted with permission from LRC.

England’s Levellers: The World’s First Libertarian Movement

0

 

Source: https://mises.org

By Roberta A. Modugno

England’s Levellers: The World’s First Libertarian Movement

 

6704The first-ever libertarians were the Levellers, an English political movement active in the seventeenth century. The Levellers contributed to the elaboration of the methodological and political paradigm of individualism, and they are at the origin of the radical strand of classical liberalism. While the Levellers are often characterized as a quasi-socialist movement, closer examination shows that the Levellers had much more in common with advocates for free markets than with socialists.

This interpretation of the Levellers is supported, among others, by Murray N. Rothbard who considers them as “the world’s first self-consciously libertarian movement.” Rothbard notes that

[i]n a series of notable debates within the Republican Army — notably between the Cromwellians and the Levellers — the Levellers led by John Lilburne, Richard Overton and William Walwyn, worked out a remarkably consistent libertarian doctrine, upholding the rights of self-ownership, private property, religious freedom for the individual, and minimal government interference in society. The rights of each individual to his person and property, furthermore, were natural, that is, they were derived from the nature of man.

One of the most important of the Levellers’s contributions to the theoretical foundation of the libertarian doctrine was, according to Rothbard, that they, “transformed the rather vague and holistic notions of natural law into the clear cut, firmly individualistic concepts of natural rights of every individual human being,” including fundamental tenets of libertarianism. This included the right to self-ownership, methodological individualism, individual natural rights theory, sound property rights, and economic freedom.

Lilburne defended natural law as “Nature and reason” and “the grounds of all just laws” and that “therefore against this Law, prescriptions, statutes, nor customs may not prevail. And if any be brought in against it, they be no prescriptions, statutes nor customs, but things void, and against justice …”

In 1646 while Lilburne was imprisoned for high treason, Overton wrote A Remonstrance of Many Thousand Citizens, and other Free-Born People of England, to their own House of Commons, urging that Lilburne be freed. The Remonstrance became a great Leveller manifesto.

“We are well assured, yet cannot forget, that the cause of our choosing you to be Parliament-men, was to deliver us from all kind of bondage, and to preserve the Commonwealth in peace and happiness,” Overton wrote. “But you are to remember, this was only of us but a power of trust, which is ever revokable. … We are your principals, and you our agents.”

Overton advocated religious tolerance, even for the much-reviled English Catholics, and also denounced the practice of impressing men into the army and navy as a form of enslavement.

Moreover, the Levellers advocated property rights and the freedom to contract and trade, as against monopolies and privileges guaranteed by the state. They celebrated the benefits of economic freedom to society and opposed the government taxes, customs, excises, and regulations that inhibited competition.

In May 1652, Walwyn presented to the Committee for Trade and Foreign Affairs a defense of free trade against the Levant Company, urging the abolition of monopolies and trade restrictions by the government. In Walwyns Conceptions; For a Free Trade, the author vindicates free trade as a common right conductive to common good. More than a century before Adam Smith, Walwyn directly linked freedom of trading to the public good. Exalting the benefits of competition, he holds that the results of free trade and competition are more and better goods, lower prices, more ships, plenty of men becoming useful members of the community, and more wealth for active and creative people.

Walwyn explored the question of whether leaving foreign trade “equally free to all Englishmen would be most profitable for the Common wealth,” and he concluded “that for foreign trade to be universally free to all English men alike, would be the most advantageous to the Common wealth.”

Walwyn criticized Parliament for carrying on the oppressions of the monarchy by maintaining all the monopolies and the privileges granted by the Crown in the field of trade. The right to trade freely, Walwyn maintained, is an ancient, natural, claimed right of all Englishmen and it is much more profitable than any government restrictions and privileges.

Continuing his analysis of competition, Walwyn notes that, “the numerousness of merchants will occasion a strife and emulation among them, who shall produce the best ordered goods.” And he underlines the advantages for the laborers, pointing out that the competition will produce, “greater price for work; whereas merchants in Companyes have noe need of such diligence … and workmen must worke at what rate they please.”

Walwyn, as well as Overton and Lilburne, attributed lamentably low wages to monopolies, hampered trade, and excise taxes.

The Levellers were concerned with economic rights and these economic rights were a direct consequence of the right to self-ownership and included individual property rights, freedom to produce, sell, buy, and trade, and to do all this without license, monopolies, regulations, and arbitrary taxation. That is to say, they advocated a free market economy. The right to trade freely was considered a natural right by Lilburne, or a “native liberty” as in Overton’s Remonstrance.

Arguing from the theoretical supremacy of natural rights, Lilburne rejects any form of regulation of trade.

Elizabeth I abolished some monopolies, but by the time the Levellers were writing, the old monopolies had been restored to support the economic and fiscal desires of the Crown. Lilburne considers such trade restrictions illegal from an ethical standpoint. Moreover they created state privileges for bankers, aristocrats, chartered companies, and corporations.

Charles I created new monopolies and privileged concessions under the name of licenses, and the Long Parliament, and subsequently Cromwell, confirmed the most relevant monopolies such as the right to export woolen cloth, the privileges of the Merchant Adventurers, and the privileges of chartered companies such as the Levant Company.

In turn, Lilburne protested against the monopolies of coal, soap, and woolen clothes. The economic concessions by public authorities paved the way to the creation of privileged positions of supremacy in public institutions and to the violation of the individual birth rights to equal opportunity to compete freely. Lilburne realized that the opposite of competition is privilege.

By the eighteenth century, what is now known as classical liberalism would draw heavily upon the work of the Levellers and their support for individual natural rights theory, property rights, economic freedom, and free trade, and the Levellers’ libertarian opposition to government privilege, government monopoly, and the suppression of free trade remains as instructive today and as it was in the seventeenth century.


 About the Author
Modugno2008Roberta A. Modugno

Roberta Modugno is professor history of political thought at the University of Roma TRE (Rome – Italy). A scholar of American libertarianism, she is the author of several works on Murray N. Rothbard and edited the collection of Rothbard’s papers, Rothbard versus the Philosophers: Unpublished Writings on Hayek, Mises, Strauss, and Polanyi

 

Image credit: https://mises.org

Policing for Profit: Teaparty, ACLU, AFP Join Forces to Fight Worst in Nation Georgia Forfeiture Laws

0

 

Source: http://www.againstcronycapitalism.org

By

Policing for Profit: Teaparty, ACLU, AFP Join Forces to Fight Worst in Nation Georgia Forfeiture Laws

 

Uncle-Sam-2-c-c-467x565

 

The ALCU and the Tea Party groups got together to fight the IRS last week. Looks like the’re getting together again in Georgia to keep cops from taking people’s property. Good.

Where possible all those who care about civil liberties (perhaps for different reasons) should pool their resources to push back against a state which has tested the limits of our Constitution. Just because one has $10,000 in cash and the police find it doesn’t mean that the police get to keep all or part of it. But that’s what many civil forfeiture laws now allow, even if one is never convicted of anything.

“Why do you have $10K in cash? “Good” citizens don’t carry $10,000 in cash. You must be a drug dealer. Because you’re a drug dealer the police department will now take your $10,000. Thank you.

What’s that you say? Did we find any drugs? You say you’re not a drug dealer? Well, that’s not how it works citizen.  We don’t need to see any drugs when you have a pile of cash.

What’s that? A pile of cash is legal to own? Sure it might be legal to own it, but its also legal for us to take it.”

(From AppalachianAreaNews.com)
 
Critics say some law enforcement officers unfairly keep money seized from motorists who are investigated for drug trafficking and other offenses and eventually cleared. One man spent $12,000 in legal fees to recover $43,000 police took from him when he was pulled over in South Georgia, the institute noted.
 
The coalition wants the Georgia Legislature to pass House Bill 1, which would put law enforcement and prosecutors under greater scrutiny over how they use cash and property seized in criminal investigations. Supporters want Georgia’s forfeiture laws to be patterned after the rules in North Carolina, in which a jury can consider seizing property only after a conviction, and only if it was used for a crime.

Click here for the article.

Image credit: http://www.againstcronycapitalism.org


Nick Sorrentino
About Nick Sorrentino

Nick Sorrentino is the co-founder and editor of AgainstCronyCapitalism.org. A political and communications consultant with clients across the political spectrum, he lives just outside of Washington DC where he can keep an eye on Leviathan.

 

Glenn “Kane” Jacobs: Selling Liberty

0

 

Glenn “Kane” Jacobs: Selling Liberty

 

3-2-2014 3-23-52 PM

 

YouTube Preview Image

Published by Journalistic Revolution

A speech in Orlando for the Orange County Campaign for Liberty chapter on 2/1/14 by Glenn “Kane” Jacobs titled; “We Gotta Market Liberty: Stop Educating, Stop Debating, and Start Selling Liberty”

You can read Glenn’s articles here:
http://dailycaller.com/author/gjacobs/
http://www.lewrockwell.com/author/gle…
http://jacobsreport.com/

 

Glen Reynolds in The USA Today: Americans rising up against government

0

Source: http://www.againstcronycapitalism.org
By Nick Sorrentino

Glen Reynolds in The USA Today: Americans rising up against government

image

Professor Reynolds points to the pushback from American citizens to the license plate tracking system bid from DHS, the scrapping (for now) of FCC monitoring of reporters (I can’t believe that I just wrote that), and the resistance of Connecticut residents to heavy handed gun control laws, as evidence of a growing and widespread resistance to government encroachment into people’s lives. I pray that he is right.

The state has become the super state. It seems to gobble up more and more bits of everyday life with each passing week. Everything is taxed in one way or another. Nearly everything is monitored. How did this happen here? Weren’t we supposed to be different? Weren’t we the ones who fought fascism in World War II and socialism in the Cold War? Weren’t we the free ones?

As the current system of crony capitalism matures, everyday citizens are becoming more aware of just what we have lost. The corporate/government superstructure looms over nearly every part of life. Many people have finally come to see that human dignity, liberty, is worth preserving. Perhaps the warm embrace of the welfare/warfare state isn’t so much an embrace as it is a strangling move.

(From The USA Today)

This is more “Irish Democracy,” passive resistance to government overreach. The Hartford (Conn.) Courant is demanding that the state use background-check records to prosecute those who haven’t registered, but the state doesn’t have the resources and it’s doubtful juries would convict ordinary, law-abiding people for failure to file some paperwork.

Though people have taken to the streets from Egypt, to Ukraine, to Venezuela toThailand, many have wondered whether Americans would ever resist the increasing encroachments on their freedom. I think they’ve begun.

Click here for the article.

Absolutely True: ‘Millennials Are the Most Libertarian Generation’

0

 

Source: http://www.againstcronycapitalism.org

By

Absolutely True: ‘Millennials Are the Most Libertarian Generation’

 

ISFL-565x209

 

The attached article comes from John Stossel who was at the International Students for Liberty conference this past weekend in Washington DC. I was there too, and John is right. Millennials are absolutely oriented toward liberty, much more so than their parents, that is for sure.

The kids at the conference were not a representative sample of course. Almost everyone kicking around the halls of the Grand Hyatt had probably read at least some Hayek and could quote you at least a couple of lines from Murray Rothbard. It was a wonky bunch. But these kids are just the tip of the liberty spear.

The current generation coming into adulthood has grown up on the Internet. The generation rising fundamentally understands the self ordering nature of markets. If an article or video is good, vote it up, and share it with friends. If an article or video isn’t good vote it down or just move on. In this process the best rises (generally) to the top.

The most important market in the world is the marketplace of ideas, and today’s new leaders live in the marketplace. The ebb and flow of the universe doesn’t scare them the way it did past generations which didn’t have the blessings of the Internet. The natural order of things is to be embraced, not feared. This is a core element of Generation Net.

So we shouldn’t be surprised by the exponential growth of libertarianism among today’s youth. It just makes sense in an open source world.

(From Newsmax)
 
” . . . this is the most libertarian generation. The millennial generation is more social, organized, and receptive to liberty, but also the most punished by the economic misconduct of older generations.”
 
Old politicians and old voters may never change their minds. But libertarianism grows fastest among the young, and so groups like Students for Liberty give me hope. Those young people sure know more about liberty that I did when I was their age.

Click here for the article.

Image credit: http://www.againstcronycapitalism.org


Nick Sorrentino
About Nick Sorrentino

Nick Sorrentino is the co-founder and editor of AgainstCronyCapitalism.org. A political and communications consultant with clients across the political spectrum, he lives just outside of Washington DC where he can keep an eye on Leviathan.

 

Aaron Russo’s Last Message to Humanity

0

 

Aaron Russo’s Last Message to Humanity

 

2-15-2014 7-19-14 PM

 

YouTube Preview Image

Published by NextNewsNetwork

Aaron Russo lost his battle with cancer shortly after this video was recorded. It is a lasting message to the people of America who struggle to preserve liberty.
Rest in Peace friend.

###

Aaron Russo shined light on the power of the individual verses the subservience of the controlled masses. #AaronRusso

Related posts with more from Aaron Russo:

America: Freedom to Fascism-Full Length Documentary

Reflections And Warnings – An Interview With Aaron Russo {Full Film}

 

Reflections of Aaron Russo

0

 

Reflections of Aaron Russo

 

2-14-2014 5-54-17 AM

 

YouTube Preview Image

Published by NextNewsNetwork

If Aaron Russo was instrumental in your conversion to liberty, please watch and share this story in his honor. He would be 71 years old today. #AaronRusso
Share to:
Facebook: http://on.fb.me/1dpynIs
Twitter: http://bit.ly/1gxiFeA
Google+: http://bit.ly/1btuDqM
LinkedIn: http://linkd.in/MPFNub
Pinterest: http://bit.ly/1eYA28c

 

Donate USD: http://nnn.is/donate-dollars
Donate BTC: http://nnn.is/donate-bitcoin

Download your free Next News “Heroes & Villains” Poster here: http://nextnewsnetwork.com/the-2013-h…

LIVE: http://NextNewsNetwork.com
Facebook: http://Facebook.com/NextNewsNet
Twitter: http://Twitter.com/NextNewsNet
Sub: http://NNN.is/the_new_media
Meet the Next News Team: http://youtu.be/2QnNKwQ2WkY
Hashtag: #N3

The Day We Fight Back – Tomorrow We Take A Stand!

0

 

The Day We Fight Back – Tomorrow We Take A Stand!

 

The Day We Fight Back

Screen capture from The Day We Fight Back

 

As I posted last month, on February 11, a broad coalition of internet-involved organizations will go online to protest massive electronic surveillance by governments around the world including illegal NSA spying. The Day We Fight Back action hopes to repeat the successful beating of SOPA/PIPA bills in 2012.  The protest coalition includes organizations holding high stakes on online freedoms, like the open-source software developer Mozilla Foundation, link aggregator Reddit, the digital rights group Electronic Frontier Foundation, Demand Progress, Campaign for Liberty, the ACLU, Tumblr and almost 6,000 more as of writing this post.

If Aaron Swartz was still with us I am sure he would be on the front line.

ChrisInMaryville will be participating in this protest.

Per Mike at Liberty Blitzkrieg who will also be participating: The protest is encouraging websites to put up a banner that will highlight ways to call and email your Congressional representatives in order to push them to support the USA Freedom Act, the only NSA focused legislation currently moving through Congress that actually has teeth to it in order to defend the 4th Amendment.

The organizations web site explains it’s mission:

DEAR USERS OF THE INTERNET,

In January 2012 we defeated the SOPA and PIPA censorship legislation with the largest Internet protest in history. Today we face another critical threat, one that again undermines the Internet and the notion that any of us live in a genuinely free society: mass surveillance.

In celebration of the win against SOPA and PIPA two years ago, and in memory of one of its leaders, Aaron Swartz, we are planning a day of protest against mass surveillance, to take place this February 11th.

Together we will push back against powers that seek to observe, collect, and analyze our every digital action. Together, we will make it clear that such behavior is not compatible with democratic governance. Together, if we persist, we will win this fight.

WHAT WE’LL DO ON FEBRUARY 11th:

If you’re in the US: Thousands of websites will host banners urging people to call/email Congress. We’ll ask legislators to oppose the FISA Improvements Act, support the USA Freedom Act, and enact protections for non-Americans.

If you’re not in the US: Visitors will be asked to urge appropriate targets to institute privacy protections.

 

More from Mike at Liberty Blitzkrieg:

The Hill covered the protest. Here are some excerpts:

Thousands of websites on Tuesday will take a stand against government surveillance by plastering protests across their home pages.

Tech companies and civil liberties organizations are hoping the demonstration, called The Day We Fight Back, will replicate their success in defeating the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and Protect IP Act (PIPA) in 2012.

This time activists are focusing their energy on supporting the USA Freedom Act, which would end or curtail many of the most controversial surveillance programs at the National Security Agency and elsewhere. 

More than 4,500 websites have pledged to help people contact their representatives in Congress to push for the Freedom Act, which was authored by Rep. James Sensenbrenner Jr. (R-Wis.) and Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.). Many sites are planning to post a banner on their pages with a widget so people can make a phone call or send an email to the lawmakers’ offices.

“Dear Internet, we’re sick of complaining about the NSA,” the banner reads. “We want new laws that curtail online surveillance. Today we fight back.”

Advocacy groups across the political spectrum, from the environmentalist organization Greenpeace to the conservative FreedomWorks have signed onto the push. 

Now here’s a very powerful video on the protest. In many ways this is a tribute to the legacy and sacrifices of the late Aaron Swartz.

YouTube Preview Image

This is the civil rights issue of our time. 5,443 websites have announced their participation. Be on the right side of history.

 

Rise of the Libertarians, 10 reasons why Slate, Salon and the progressive media are afraid

0

 

Source: http://www.againstcronycapitalism.org

By

Rise of the Libertarians, 10 reasons why Slate, Salon and the progressive media are afraid

 

liberty-freedom-cc-565x265

 

Attached is an extremely well done article which lays out why it is that today’s political establishment, especially the “progressives” are so afraid of libertarianism.

Libertarianism is a logical evolution from statism. Statism is a 20th Century ideology based in the idea that systems were closed and if the right smart people ran society an egalitarian Utopia would bloom. If we could create an atom bomb with concerted government directed efforts why could we not also engineer the society (many) people wanted? In the dark days of a rising Soviet Union and expanding a New Deal, very few thought of the economy as a living breathing thing. Something which was alive and composed of billions and billions of exchanges and human decisions. Society was instead a machine, a factory. From this factory we could create the dream which had so long eluded humanity.

But this kind of thinking, contrary to what people thought at the time, was not a revolution against oppressive feudalism and the industrial revolution. Statism was and is an extension of it. Government as a massive corporation, nominally “owned by the workers of the world” but always controlled by a group of lever pullers who look remarkably like the group of lever pullers they replaced.

Libertarianism in contrast embraces an open source society. People, every day people, are valued as individuals. In a world where individuals are more educated than ever – and I don’t mean in the sense that people have more degrees than in the past, I mean in the sense that through the Internet people know much more about the world around them – individuals demand respect. People are not cogs to be placed in a machine by self designated social engineers. People are living entities who come together, or choose not to depending on perceived value.

Progressivism, statism, in contrast is about force. It is about a failed top down 20th Century religion based in the fever dreams of Marx and Hegel from the 19th Century. Seriously, it is a religion.

For those looking forward. For those who despise coercion. Who value human dignity. Who have faith in their abilities and a healthy fear of bureaucrats who say they know best when the data shows over and over that they don’t. For those who believe that each person should be given the chance to actualize his or her gifts to the maximum degree possible. For those who believe that society to the degree possible should be VOLUNTARY. For those who believe that they know how to manage their lives better than some government employee sitting in a stone building somewhere. Well, libertarianism has quite a lot to offer.

And to think Rachael Maddow said that the “era of small government was over” right after the government shutdown in October, and right before Obamacare blew up. And I think she honestly believed it, along with the rest of the establishment. Only 5 months ago.

For the record since this particularly sweet moment her ratings have tanked, though she does now have a wealthy new sponsor for her show, Exxon Mobile. Kudos to her on that.

So welcome to the (peaceful) revolution America and it’s just beginning. Welcome to ACTUAL CHANGE. It is an exciting time, and take absolutely nothing for granted.

(From FEE.org)
 
8.   Libertarians really don’t like crony capitalism. For all the lip service progressives pay to the “problem” of income inequality, they consistently back the most illiberal and inegalitarian policies. Is there anything fair about showering taxpayer resources upon this energy company or that—and making their CEOs’ wealth more secure in the process? Is there anything equitable about shoring up the U.S. banking cartel with permanent legislation like Dodd-Frank? And what chosen “one-percenters” are benefitting from the crony-infested Obamacare legislation, which rains goodies down on drug-makers, healthcare providers, and insurance companies in equal measure? On the other hand, while libertarians don’t mind the sort of inequality that comes from people successfully creating happy customers, wealth, and jobs, we really—no really—don’t like collusion between business interests and government power.

Click here for the article.

Image credit: http://www.againstcronycapitalism.org


Nick Sorrentino
About Nick Sorrentino

Nick Sorrentino is the co-founder and editor of AgainstCronyCapitalism.org. A political and communications consultant with clients across the political spectrum, he lives just outside of Washington DC where he can keep an eye on Leviathan.

 

 

Go to Top