Posts tagged statism

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.

 

 

Who will win the war for the Internet? The corporate state or individuals?

0

 

Source: http://www.againstcronycapitalism.org

By

Who will win the war for the Internet? The corporate state or individuals?

 

Freedom_of_Thought_Ben_Franklin-cc-565x423

 

Are corporations partnering with government going to kill the freedom and liberty we have all enjoyed on the Internet for years? Will CISPA and similar laws skew power toward the state, turning the wild and free net into a locked down digital commons. A prison yard even?

The government it seems would like to lock down the net. The once free United States is actively eavesdropped on by her own government. We now know this for sure. In a clear violation of the 4th Amendment the government is gathering our data to be processed by algorithms yet to be developed.

Add Diane Feinstein and her ilk in Congress relentlessly trying to shut down any free thought at all on the web (unless officially sanctioned) and its plain to see that we liberty loving cyber citizens are under severe threat.

Sadly many of the champions of the Internet, some of the trail blazing companies born in the recent past have been brought to heel, and into the government fold. (Most probably had no choice.) There was even a report that Windows 8 has an NSA Trojan horse component built into it. At least the German government thinks this might be the case.

It seems that the tide of corporatism and outright statism on the net is rising. But it can be beaten back.

(From The Atlantic)

We’re in the middle of an epic battle for power in cyberspace. On one side are the traditional, organized, institutional powers such as governments and large multinational corporations. On the other are the distributed and nimble: grassroots movements, dissident groups, hackers, and criminals. Initially, the Internet empowered the second side. It gave them a place to coordinate and communicate efficiently, and made them seem unbeatable. But now, the more traditional institutional powers are winning, and winning big. How these two side fare in the long term, and the fate of the rest of us who don’t fall into either group, is an open question—and one vitally important to the future of the Internet.

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.

Lew Rockwell: Ron Paul Has ‘Secret’ Plans for Continued Leadership For The Liberty Movement

0

Source: http://libertycrier.com

YouTube Preview Image

Lew Rockwell appears on the Alex Jones show and discusses what’s next for the liberty movements fight against statism. At the beginning of the interview Lew tells us that Ron Paul has big plans for the liberty movement but cannot reveal them until he is out of congress. Lew says that Ron Paul will be more powerful now that he is out of politics.

###

Related Post: Lew Rockwell Owns the Gang of Overlords

Patriotism

0

Source: http://www.lewrockwell.com

Patriotism

by Ron Paul

Before the U.S. House of Representatives, May 22, 2007


Madam Speaker,
for some, patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel. For others,
it means dissent against a government’s abuse of the people’s rights.

I have never
met a politician in Washington or any American, for that matter,
who chose to be called unpatriotic. Nor have I met anyone who did
not believe he wholeheartedly supported our troops, wherever they
may be.

What I have
heard all too frequently from various individuals are sharp accusations
that, because their political opponents disagree with them on the
need for foreign military entanglements, they were unpatriotic,
un-American evildoers deserving contempt.

The original
American patriots were those individuals brave enough to resist
with force the oppressive power of King George. I accept the definition

of patriotism as that effort to resist oppressive state power.

The true patriot
is motivated by a sense of responsibility and out of self-interest
for himself, his family, and the future of his country to resist
government abuse of power. He rejects the notion that patriotism
means obedience to the state. Resistance need not be violent, but
the civil disobedience that might be required involves confrontation
with the state and invites possible imprisonment.

Peaceful,
nonviolent revolutions against tyranny have been every bit as successful
as those involving military confrontation. Mahatma Gandhi and Dr.
Martin Luther King, Jr., achieved great political successes by practicing
nonviolence, and yet they suffered physically at the hands of the
state. But whether the resistance against government tyrants is
nonviolent or physically violent, the effort to overthrow state
oppression qualifies as true patriotism.

True patriotism
today has gotten a bad name, at least from the government and the
press. Those who now challenge the unconstitutional methods of imposing
an income tax on us, or force us to use a monetary system designed
to serve the rich at the expense of the poor are routinely condemned.
These American patriots are sadly looked down upon by many. They
are never praised as champions of liberty as Gandhi and Martin Luther
King have been.

Liberals,
who withhold their taxes as a protest against war, are vilified
as well, especially by conservatives. Unquestioned loyalty to the
state is especially demanded in times of war. Lack of support for
a war policy is said to be unpatriotic. Arguments against a particular
policy that endorses a war, once it is started, are always said
to be endangering the troops in the field. This, they blatantly
claim, is unpatriotic, and all dissent must stop. Yet, it is dissent
from government policies that defines the true patriot and champion

of liberty.

It is conveniently
ignored that the only authentic way to best support the troops is
to keep them out of dangerous undeclared no-win wars that are politically
inspired. Sending troops off to war for reasons that are not truly
related to national security and, for that matter, may even damage
our security, is hardly a way to patriotically support the troops.


(more…)

Andrew Napolitano – The FBI vs Freedom

0
YouTube Preview Image
Go to Top