Debt Prison

I’ve been pondering over what should be called the Liberal Socialist Movement within the United States. It seems the politics of the Democratic Platform consists mainly of a national transition towards hard Socialism. It’s interesting that many members of the GOP have currently decided that government mandated healthcare, for ever man, woman, and child, is a priority of government responsibility. I soon began asking myself “If these people believe these Socialist policies are the solution, then why not move to a country where these enlightened arrangements are already public policy?” Where would America’s socialists go? I considered France, England, or perhaps even mother Russia. Rather than to beat their heads against the wall here, fighting limited government ideals, these countries await them with an established socialist Utopia. Perhaps it’s their desire to enjoy the prosperity that free market economics has afforded them, that keeps them firmly planted in the U.S… As history has shown, time and again, these groups fail to realize that the destruction of free market economics will likewise lead to the dismal lifestyles incurred in such progressive countries.

On the other hand, if libertarians decided to leave America in search of a country, I contemplated, “Where would they go?” What country on the planet exists which respects individual rights over that of political groups? I couldn’t think of one. I genuinely believe that libertarians want the U.S. to return to limited government ideals. A government which, once again, protects private property and individual rights. After all, it was America which first embarked on this grand experiment of a nation which is ruled by its citizens, rather than a government which immoderately enslaves them.

America’s return to Liberty is illogical

People in America have decided that they’d rather have financial and physical security in place of individual rights and private property. And in what has become largely a fatherless society, is it any wonder that our citizens look towards government to fulfill the absence of authority, discipline, and security that no longer exists at home? This process is accurately portrayed in the following statement by Alexander Tytler in ‘Cycle of Democracy’ (1770).

“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover they can vote themselves largess from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising them the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world’s greatest civilizations has been 200 years. These nations have progressed through this sequence: From bondage to spiritual faith; from spiritual faith to great courage; from courage to liberty; from liberty to abundance; from abundance to selfishness; from selfishness to apathy; from apathy to dependence; from dependency back again into bondage.”

Unfortunately human nature demands, generation after generation, that the missteps of the past be repeated. So it is with hope that I contemplate the future of life, liberty, and property.

But suppose that we decided to create a libertarian society in the near future. A society which we would set up, and regulate, to protect our rights as individuals, as well as the rights we believe pertain to our property. We should take a look at recent history to analyze societies that have accomplished this.

America, Australia, and Israel

It should be observed that these societies were created at the expense of another society’s liberty. As the ‘New World’ was flooded with Europe’s poor and criminal, the way of life for those whom were native to these western continents writhed in anguish. Their land was transformed, their way of life destroyed, and eventually the near genocide of an entire race of people was manifested. In Australia, the same can be said of the Aborigine. He was driven from his lands, denied his liberties, and enslaved to a new and powerful adversary. The Zionist Movement would culminate in the Jewish people occupying and regulating, in what would become modern Israel. This newly formed society was afforded by the sacrifice of liberty on the part of Palestinians.

Let us observe that the creation of a new society occurs at the expense of another. Just as new technologies are produced, old technology is sacrificed. In order to safeguard our rights as libertarians, aggression may become as valuable a tool as our political platform. Liberty is possible only at a cost to what another society may view as a violation of their liberty. Within our very own USA, libertarians could declare their land private property, and above the taxation of local governments. But local governments would decry the violation of their liberty to collect these taxes for the benefit of the community.

Aggression as a tool

One thing is certain on earth. That is, that powerful groups will dominate others. Libertarians would like to remove this concept from the human psyche, just as liberals would like to declare all humans of equal strengths and talents. But let us not be so quick to disavow our nature. Has our nature not allowed us to survive and thrive for hundreds of thousands of years? Has our nature not provided us with the very civilization in which we thrive today? As history has shown, there is a time to exercise our ability and aggression, to safeguard our society against those whom see humans as little more than puppets on a string, with themselves as the master.

My point is that to create our Libertaria, the liberty of another society must be sacrificed. I use my very own America as proof. Watch as the masses vote for dependency, for the sacrifice of liberty, and for the perpetuation of their own enslavement. How can you return liberty to people such as this?

Find a lawless land

There are two ways to create a society based on individual rights and private property. The first is to move so far away from other humans, that they have no control over your activities. I doubt anyone would care what you do in the northern most reaches of Canada. Alone and self sufficient, you could live your life as you see fit. Granted, it would be a small society. The conflict arrives from our need to interact with others. To exchange our goods in a market or to earn wages to purchase goods offered within a market. The other option is to take someone else’s land and claim it as our own.

To create Libertaria, another society must be conquered and perhaps expelled from the lands of libertarians. This is the way that new cultures are often developed. But particularly true in this modern and global world in which we live. In order for libertarians to create Libertaria, they should agree upon a lawless country, immigrate there by the millions, and then claim the land as their own. This is similar to what the Israeli’s have done. They moved into an area and assumed control. For example, pick a country in modern South America that is lawless and desolate. One that is unlikely to attract the arousal of other countries - particularly the super powers like the U.S., Russia, or China.

The creation of libertarian government

Libertarians would need to accomplish two very important goals in attempting to establish themselves as rulers of a new land. First they would need to obtain weapons to preserve their lives and liberty. This would be accomplished by purchasing or trading with the governments of other countries which disapproved of the present leadership - of the country you are attempting to occupy (just as the U.S. armed Iran, Saddam Hussein, and Osama Bin Laden). After subduing and conquering the present government - a system of security should be implemented so that energy could be focused on law and monetary policy. I believe the first order of business would be to develop a currency backed by gold (gold standard) and to write a constitution (one that eliminates the failures of America).

Perhaps in creating a constitution we would consider the words of Frederic Bastiat “See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime. Abolish this law without delay, for it is not only an evil itself, but also it is a fertile source for further evils because it invites reprisals. If such a law - which may be an isolated case - is not abolished immediately, it will spread, multiply, and develop into a system.”

Currency and a Constitution

I mention a gold standard because this would be a very efficient way of convincing other countries to take interest, in not only our currency, but our economy as well. Obviously it’s also a way to keep government spending under control. Combine this with a constitution based on private property and individual rights….and you’ve got the next Hong Kong on your hands. Foreign investments would sky rocket as profit potential appears limitless (within the credit creation guidelines of a gold standard), thanks to low taxes and respect for private property. A new country destined to financial prosperity, thanks to the implementation of free market economics and an inflation proof currency. Of course, shortly I would expect world leaders like George W. Bush to begin forecasting that this new nation “threatens the international global economy with their currency.” Perhaps he would send in an ‘International Committee’ to examine our stockpiles of gold bullion. Perhaps even an invasion and occupation by superior forces is a possibility for us to consider.

In writing a constitution I think we would examine the principles laid down in the original U.S. Constitution. We should then consider all the mistakes that were implemented, which resulted in America becoming a socialist society. Our goal would be to eliminate the gaps which allowed such disaster to manifest. As a young country our dominant priority would be in preserving our liberty from the hands of those whom would destroy us. For there would be many. Private property and individual rights have become quite the red headed step child these days. These words are equated with bigots and greed mongers.

Though I don’t believe the above scenario will occur in my lifetime, I do believe this to be the only way in which it could. You cannot force humans to accept liberty. It’s something they must desire. And often they refuse to desire it until they’ve suffered heavily. In Alan Greespan’s autobiography ‘The Age of Turbulence‘, he speaks of the nights spent with Ayn Rand’s cult of followers, debating philosophy in her apartment.

“According to objectivist precepts, taxation was immoral because it allowed for government appropriation of private property by force. Yet if taxation was wrong, how could you reliably finance the essential functions of government, including the protection of individuals’ rights through police power?”

Greenspan didn’t agree with Rand’s conclusion - that people would volunteer for the assignment, and I don’t either. There is a limit to how much freedom we can have, just as there is a limit to how much authority government should have, if we seriously intend to safeguard our liberties.

If you have found this information to be useful, please leave a donation for Barry.

Related Articles

* The End of White Tyranny

* Do we have private property in the USA?

* Government waste and FEMA trailers

* The Poor People I Know

* Guns and The Power of Free People

Tags: constitution, gold, libertaria, socialist

This entry was posted on Tuesday, April 1st, 2008 at 5:13 pm and is filed under Politics. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.