sexta-feira, outubro 16, 2015

Citação Liberal do Dia

Robert Higgs:
Fellow Americans, when you speak of actions the U.S. government has taken -- for example, plundering people by "taxation," irresponsibly spending vast sums of other people's money, monopolizing and mismanaging the money stock, bombing hospitals in war zones, constantly killing and otherwise punishing innocent people in various parts of the world, including the USA -- please, please do not use the pronoun "we." Very few of us qualify as responsible for such actions, and some of us identify with the responsible government in no way other than as its victims. The people who constitute the U.S. government belong to one set; any "we" to which I belong comprises elements of a disjoint set. The U.S. government is a criminal organization, whereas the rest of us are, for the most part, peaceful, cooperative, and innocent of any genuine crime. The government is intrinsically criminal, whereas the rest of us are sometimes guilty of crimes only by virtue of individual lapses of morality and self-control.

Scientific Method


Libertarianism’s Ultimate Logical Conclusion por Christopher Cantwell:
I believe it is the natural right of every man woman and child to live free from initiatory violence and fraud, and that the only proper exercise of violence in human society is the defense therefrom. To speak of these values initially sounds quite reasonable to many.
Even amongst those who have accepted this theory as their mantra, there exists great hesitation to carry it through to its ultimate logical conclusion. That being, if one has the right to use violence to defend themselves against initiatory force, and the government exists solely to initiate force against the populace, and refuses to stop its predations when we ask politely. Then the reasonable man is compelled to do something most see as quite unreasonable.

To violently overthrow that institution. To take up arms against his government and kill its agents, and stop them by force.
A free man need not ask permission. He does as he sees fit. If others violently interfere with his peaceful activities, whether that criminal be wearing a bandana, a badge, or suit, then he defends himself with whatever level of force is necessary. Though he may take no pleasure in it, he ends lives if he must.
You may choose not to fight, you may choose to delay your fighting in hopes of fighting at a more advantageous time, you may choose to support those who fight in other ways, you may even choose to fight on the other side. But on your list of options does not exist a choice to avoid the war entirely. The war has been brought to you against your will.

Música Liberal do Dia

Mata-Ratos - Rouba o Que é Teu

(via FB Mises Portugal)


The Menace of Egalitarianism por Lew Rockwell:
A libertarian is perfectly at peace with the universal phenomenon of human difference. He does not wish it away, he does not shake his fist at it, he does not pretend not to notice it. It affords him another opportunity to marvel at a miracle of the market: its ability to incorporate just about anyone into the division of labor.

Indeed the division of labor is based on human difference. Each of us finds that niche that suits our natural talents best, and by specializing in that particular thing we can most effectively serve our fellow man. Our fellow man, likewise, specializes in what he is best suited for, and we in turn benefit from the fruits of his specialized knowledge and skill.

So there is a place for everyone in the market economy. And what’s more, since the market economy rewards those who are able to produce goods at affordable prices for a mass market, it is precisely the average person to whom captains of industry are all but forced to cater. This is an arrangement to celebrate, not deplore.
The obsession with equality, in short, undermines every indicator of health we might look for in a civilization. It involves a madness so complete that although it flirts with the destruction of the family, it never stops to consider whether this conclusion might mean the whole line of thought may have been deranged to begin with. It leads to the destruction of standards – scholarly, cultural, and behavioral. It is based on assertion rather than evidence, and it attempts to gain ground not through rational argument but by intimidating opponents into silence. There is nothing honorable or admirable about any aspect of the egalitarian program.