Return to the Free Liberal Homepage

February 28, 2008

Warmongering vs. Socialism

Paul Gessing is very worried that a John McCain presidency would increase injustice and violence through continued (expanded?) war on the world. I am concerned about this, but I wonder if bad economic policy isn't worse, especially given the socialist leanings of the current Congress.

The Financial Times had this to say about the Democratic candidates on economics:

Barack Obama, now the favourite to secure both the nomination and the White House, once had intelligent things to say about trade. He has lately positioned himself as a hardliner among the hardliners...Mr Obama and the Democrats have been seized with a kind of intellectual and political cowardice. The implications of this lack of spine are grave – and extend beyond economics. The next Democratic administration promises to repair US alliances and standing in the world. A worthy aim. Yet its first act, the party says, will be to tell its closest neighbours that the rules they are all agreed to are defunct – and if they do not like it, tough luck.

/KDR

Posted by KevinRollins at 07:08 PM | Comments (6)

February 12, 2008

John McCain: Unfit to Lead

Sheldon Richman over at Future of Freedom Foundation has a great article about John McCain and the conservatives who oppose his nomination as the Republican Party candidate for President. I, like Richman, have major problems with McCain's candidacy and agree with him that his immigration stance is the least of our worries. As bad as Clinton or Obama may be on a variety of issues vital to conservatives, free liberals, and libertarians alike, none of them have joked about bombing Iran.

While it may be tough to discern what "conservative" means or what the Republican Party stands for, if anything, if McCain is elected and does decide to go into Iran, the concepts of limited government and individual freedom will be rendered meaningless in this country. While conservatives may oppose McCain for different reasons than we would, I hope they remain firm in what principles they have left against a McCain presidency.

Posted by PaulGessing at 03:56 PM | Comments (1)

Escaping the State?

Commenting on my blog 283 Nonarchy Pods -- Comin' Right Up, Tarvok makes a good – though obvious – point:

"With the exception of only the most marginal of land (read: uninhabitable), or a few anomalous regions such as Somalia, where can one go to escape the State?"

I'd ask the question: Why is that? Whether Iceland in 1000 AD was inhabitable or not is a question of taste, but nonarchists persist in citing the Iceland experience as somehow "proof" that nonarchy can work. Perhaps the opposite is the case: That isolated Iceland couldn't maintain its nonarchy illustrates that nonarchy is – for now, at least – an unsustainable model.

Weapons of war back then were primitive, yet Iceland was overwhelmed. Habitable places today would have to face far more sophisticated weapons. Is there any doubt that if the Long (now) 285 were to somehow prevail that the geographic area formerly known as the United States would quickly be overrun?

Perhaps we should all go back to the dorm room and play another round of Dungeons & Dragons...right after watching reruns of Star Trek.

-RC

Posted by RobertCapozzi at 06:55 AM | Comments (10)

February 09, 2008

283 Nonarchy Pods -- Comin' Right Up

Nonarchist theorist Roderick Long, philosophy prof at Auburn, is bold. He's so bold that he and 282 other brave souls are petitioning the government – to abolish itself! And be replaced with...nothing.

Always one to prefer constructive criticism, Long might want to consider broadening his "demands" out a bit. Why limit his petition to the United States? If Marx can cry out: "Workers of the world, unite!" why can't Long exclaim: "Governments of the world, dissolve!"

Of course, all the stockpiles of munitions will need to be disposed of, but why get wrapped around one's axles about such minor details?

Long is technically correct when he states, "...few if any of those over whom you claim authority have ever consented to such governance...." After all, did you sign a contract with the government that gives them authority to do what they do? I know I didn't. I'm quite sure I'd like government to do less, a lot less in my dreams. I've even toyed with moving to the stateless area formerly known as Somalia, but I've become accustomed to my inside-the-Beltway oasis and its creature comforts. And, while a time machine has yet to be invented, it might be cool to teleport back a thousand years to Iceland. This way, I can validate the historians who claim to've read the records scratched on bogs that suggest that perhaps that isolated tundra of an island was an anarcho-paradise. Of course, that even Iceland could not maintain its nonarchic utopia might -- just might -- give pause to the Long 283.

Or, like the sun rising and setting, we just might accept that some sort of State seems likely for the foreseeable future and beyond. Call that a "constructive contract" if you must, but unless the 283 swells to tens of millions, I'm making book on some semblance of government continuity. And, near as I can tell, 99.9999% seem to accede to the terms, more or less.

Still, it seems we should have compassion for the 283. What to do? My modest proposal: Nonarchy Pods. If someone really, really, really wants to opt out of the state's authority to keep the peace, we should let them. They can buy a pod that envelopes them on their property. The pod is impenetrable – nothing comes in or out. They become autonomous little Lichtensteins, except they cannot leave, as the 283 have stated they refuse to abide by the rule of law here amongst the governed.

OK, OK, we allow them to trade through a small hole in the pod, I'm feeling generous. And if someone wants to go in the pod, they may, so long as the understand that there is no exit.

And now back to our regularly scheduled program, "Roll Back the State."

-RC

Posted by RobertCapozzi at 07:08 AM | Comments (4)

February 07, 2008

Calculating the Cost of a Carbon Tax

Over at Holistic Politics, I have updated my chapter on cheap and pleasant ways to fight global warming.

In particular, I have incorporated more recent tax and energy statistics for my calculations of what carbon tax rates are needed to replace either the income tax or FICA and the impact on energy prices. Assuming no immediate conservation, a $0.67/kg tax on fossil fuel carbon could replace the income tax. This translates roughly into a $2 hike in gasoline prices and a $0.106 hike in the cost of a kilowatt hour of electricity. In actual practice, we'd have to go with higher rates to offset the effects of conservation.

If people conserve too much, completely replacing the personal income tax with a carbon tax would be impossible without deep spending cuts. But there are other possible uses for a carbon tax: deficit reduction, cuts in other taxes or funding a Citizen's Dividend. To this end, I added some carbon tax calculators so you can design your own carbon tax.

Enjoy.

Posted by CarlMilsted at 10:44 AM | Comments (2)

February 06, 2008

Is The Path to Liberty to the North?

Here's a pattern that may be of interest to TFL readers: On Super Tuesday, Ron Paul broke double digits in four states. Part of this might simply be because the field is smaller. On the other hand, the early primaries were more jump-balls, without a clear front-runner, which McCain has become since FL.

Perhaps more interesting is that Paul bested 10% in northern tier states, and did worst in southern tier states on Super Tues. He achieved double digits in MN, ND, MT, AK, and nowhere else.

Paul's support was worst in the southern states of GA, AL, OK, along with MA, which is no surprise. Throw out the convention format in WV, and UT as a kind of Mormon pride vote for Romney, who got 90% there.

Implication? Perhaps none. But it could be that the "leave me alone" attitude is stronger in colder, more isolated places.

-RC

Posted by RobertCapozzi at 07:20 AM | Comments (5)

February 01, 2008

Obama Can Fix America's Image

So says "U.S. Rep. Jim Oberstar, the dean of the Minnesota congressional delegation . . . ."

I believe the largest challenge of the next president is not global warming, not restarting the domestic economy, but changing America's image in the world," he said. "For that we need a transformational president. I think Sen. Obama will be that transformational president around whom the rest of the world can rally.

Where I come from, we call that "Amero-centric Thinking." Or something like that. I thought it was Rush Limbaugh who believed in "American Exceptionalism."

The portrayal of "image" as being an important, pragmatic issue is interesting, given the traditional distinction in our culture (going back to Plato and Aristotle) between "image" and "substance."

*ponders*

-MT

Posted by MicahTillman at 09:28 PM | Comments (2)

Fed to Blame?

Could the Fed have done better, or is it hopelessly flawed (and should be abolished)?

A list of criticisms here.

Thoughts?

/KDR

Posted by KevinRollins at 12:11 AM | Comments (5)

Free-for-all (frfr-ôl) -- n. A disorderly fight, argument, or competition in which everyone present participates.

from Dictionary.com



supportus.png

If you enjoy our site or our print publication, please consider making a contribution today!


SIMPLE AD ERROR VIEW COUNT NOT UPDATED
Advertisement


Return to the Free Liberal Homepage


Subscribe to our list:


About the Free Liberal
The Free Liberal is an independent journal of transpartisan thought.

The views expressed herein are those of the writers individually and not necessarily those of the Free Liberal, the Center for Liberty and Community, or its board of directors.