Monthly Archives: December 2006

Quote of the Day

I am passionate about my commitment to limited government and freedom. I simply know that you can not have unlimited opportunity and unlimited government. Although today I view the terrorist threat from this radical strain of Islam to be the greatest threat to my country and my family, I frankly view the second greatest threat as a federal government that has grown too large, too intrusive, too powerful and too expensive. Since I’ve got into the daddy business 4½ years ago, I’ve spent a lot of time thinking about the next generation. And we know if we don’t reform the big three entitlement programs, the next generation is going to face a rather nasty fiscal fork in the road. The bottom line is, for all intents and purposes, there will be no federal government in one generation except Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security or we’re going to have to double taxes. I find both of those untenable.

–Texas Congressman and incoming chairman of the Republican Study Committee Jeb Hensarling in an interview on December 18,2006.

I’m one of the original co-founders of The Liberty Papers all the way back in 2005. Since then, I wound up doing this blogging thing professionally. Now I’m running the site now. You can find my other work at The Hayride.com and Rare. You can also find me over at the R Street Institute.

Barry Goldwater Spins In His Grave

President Bush has officially abandoned the idea that the Republican Party believes in economic freedom:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – President George W. Bush said on Wednesday that he supports a Democratic proposal to increase the U.S. minimum wage but said it should be coupled with tax and regulatory relief for small businesses.

“I believe we should do it in a way that does not punish the millions of small businesses that are creating most of the new jobs in our country,” Bush told a news conference. “So, I support pairing it with targeted tax and regulatory relief to help these small businesses stay competitive and to help keep our economy growing.”

How about just leaving business alone to begin with ?

H/T: Club For Growth

What Conservatives Believe (Today, At Least)

In Human Events, Terence P. Jeffrey outlines the latest definition of principles of American Conservatism.

1. God’s Law Governs Nations as Well as Men.

The Ten Commandments should not only be enshrined in our courthouses, they should be engraved in our hearts and minds as guides to all behavior, public and private. As the Founders acknowledged in the Declaration of Independence, laws and policies that violate the natural law are abuses of government power that must be resisted and reversed.

Jeffrey confuses the Deism of our founding fathers with the “Judeo-Christian” beliefs that American conservatives seem to love so much. Natural rights can be derived either from our Creator or from reason. The United States was not established to be a Christian nation and Christ’s teachings were not targeted to nations, they were targeted to individuals. While it is important that the state acknowledges our natural rights, it is a stretch to claim that posting the Ten Commandments on a courthouse lawn is part of them.

2. Life Is the First God-Given Right

It’s always wrong to deliberately take an innocent human life. When this principle is abridged, violence escalates. Thus we have aborted 47 million unborn babies in the past three decades, begun to accept euthanasia and doctor-assisted suicide, and stand at the threshold of cloning human beings for the specific purpose of killing them.

While the right to life one of the most important rights we have as human beings, I would argue the right to liberty is the most important. While I do agree it is wrong to deliberately to take an innocent human life, the state is equally wrong to violate the right to liberty to prevent the loss of life through self-inflicted stupid acts (such as drug overdoses, suicide, obesity, etc.). This would lead down the road to a nanny state.

3. Marriage and Family Come Before the State and Deserve Its Protection

The marriage of one man and one woman is the natural foundation of all human society, and the means by which children ought to be brought into the world and taught the basic values of our civilization. Government has a duty to recognize and protect the family and must not grant alternative relationships the same status and privileges.

The actions of the state are more harmful to marriage and the family than any actions of homesexuals could ever be. The state undermines the family through government education via the government schools, an unbearable tax code, no fault divorce laws, and finally through the state sanctioning of marriage itself, among other things. If Jeffrey is concerned about protecting the family, he should be screaming from the rooftops that government should get out of the marriage business and that the church should resume its role as the guardian of marriage. While the state should not be in the marriage business, the state should not descriminate on the basis of gender and sexuality in legal contracts allowing couples inherit property, hospital visits, and other legal procedures.

4. Freedom of Conscience is the Soul of Liberty

Understanding that freedom of conscience is at the heart of liberty, the Framers protected freedom of religion and assembly in the 1st Amendment. Movements to force the Boy Scouts to accept homosexual scout masters, or to compel religious individuals or organizations to distribute birth control or abortion drugs against their beliefs, directly attack these freedoms.

I would add to this allowing our lawmakers to swear their oaths on whichever holy book they believe in.

5. Private Property is the Servant of Freedom

The more that individuals, families and businesses can acquire and control the goods necessary to sustain and advance themselves, the more autonomy they will have from the state and others who may wish to unjustly restrict their freedom. The free and responsible use of private property tends to create greater wealth and greater freedom for greater numbers of people.

6. Government Dependency is the Seed of Tyranny

The more that individuals, families and businesses are dependent on the state for the goods necessary to sustain and advance themselves, the less autonomy they will have from the state and others who may wish to unjustly restrict their freedom. This is why expanding the welfare state is bad, and Social Security personal retirement accounts, Health Savings Accounts and school choice are good.

These could two ideas could not have been stated better.

7. The Constitution Means What It Says

Believing in the God-given rights of man and understanding the imperfect nature of human beings, the Framers crafted a Constitution designed to protect the former from the latter. Many of the problems in U.S. government would be resolved if the President, Congress and Courts limited themselves and each other to the authority the Constitution actually grants them.

I think this is one of the main reasons why conservatives and libertarians have always been more or less aligned politically; we both understand the imperfect nature of human beings and we have a natural distrust of government.

8. Taxes Are Justified Only to Fund Necessary Government Spending

A massive and complex tax code has become a powerful weapon politicians can use to pressure citizens to behave as the politicians, or the interest groups that support the politicians, wish. The correct function of taxation is to equitably collect only that revenue needed to fund the legitimate activities of a constitutionally limited government.

I’m curious to think what Jeffrey thinks about Faith Based programs that the current “conservative” president loves so much.

9. National Defense Is Just That

The first duty of the federal government is to defend the American people against foreign enemies. While advancing freedom in the world is good in itself—and, where it prudently can be done, would advance the interests of the United States–ultimately, the mandate for our national leaders is to use whatever moral means they can to carve out that path in our relations with foreign powers that is most likely to lead to enhanced security, prosperity and freedom for this nation.

The Weekly Standard’s contributors won’t like this one very much.

10. We Should Strive to Give Our Children a Better Country

America is more than just an expanse of territory or a set of laws. It is a culture, whose art, architecture, journalism, music, movies, television, schools and universities, should reflect and reinforce the traditional values that made this country great. We owe this to our children, who will build the America of tomorrow on the foundation of the America we teach them to love today.

Unfortunately, this principle lays out what I believe some of the contradictions of the conservative philosophy. Conservatism attempts to be a philosophy of both politics and life. The conservative value on tradition unfortunately at times contradicts and compromises their belief in limited government. Whereas the classical liberal philosophy is purely a political philosophy and there is no contradiction that would compromise the belief in limited government.

I’m one of the original co-founders of The Liberty Papers all the way back in 2005. Since then, I wound up doing this blogging thing professionally. Now I’m running the site now. You can find my other work at The Hayride.com and Rare. You can also find me over at the R Street Institute.

Building a Better Mousetrap Pot Plant

Mexican Soldiers Find Hybrid Pot Plants

Thousands of soldiers sent to seize control of one of Mexico’s top drug-producing regions have discovered widespread cultivation of a hybrid marijuana plant that is easy to grow and difficult to kill, officials said Tuesday.

The plants can only be killed by having their roots pulled, a slow and tedious task, Army Gen. Manuel Garcia told The Associated Press, one of four media outlets allowed to accompany soldiers on the daylong raid.

“Before we could cut the plant and destroy it, but this plant will come back to life unless it’s taken out by the roots,” Garcia said.

The hybrid first appeared in Mexico two years ago but has become the plant of choice for drug traffickers in western Michoacan state, a remote mountainous region that lends to itself to drug production.

The plants resist chemicals that only burn the top leaves without hurting the root, making aerial fumigation impossible, Garcia said.

Does anyone think for a second that this would have happened without a ridiculous drug war causing the pot business to be extremely profit-laden?

In one sense, it’s a reminder of just how ingenious the market can be when providing a desired product, even if it’s illegal. In the future, I think it’s obvious that the marijuana market will be legalized and taxed either by individual states or on a federal level. This means that future businesses could be on to innovative industry changes such as cbd dropshipping and other prospects that could all eventually stem from a once illegal market. In another sense, I get a bit worried when people are creating plants that won’t die. It reminds me of the plant that ate the South…

Hat Tip: Control Congress

Libertarianism and Utilitarianism

In the comments to my last post, one of our regular commenters asked a very interesting question:

“Libertarianism is a moral system, valuing individual liberty as it’s highest ideal.”

I have finally gotten an answer. When seen in that light it changes many debates. We must discuss just what is an unalienable right, and does it have value. What defines a moral system if “the good” isn’t it goal? What purpose does that system have, if it is not how we live in a society?

VRB has inadvertently touched on a major philosophical split. She asks what defines a moral system if not “the good”. What she is talking about is utilitarianism. Utilitarianism is also a moral philosophy, but unlike libertarianism it seeks to maximize utility (“the good”) rather than liberty.

To better understand, the American Constitution is a document that enshrines the libertarian ideal. It is a document that does very little to provide for the “common good”, preferring a hands-off approach by government and letting people work out the “common good” through voluntary means if they so choose. Socialism, in all its forms, is a system of government that enshrines a utilitarian ideal. It is willing to submit freedom to providing for the “common good”. Our current American government is a mix between the two. The progressive taxation and welfare system attempts to be utilitarian, submitting the liberty to keep what you earn to the need of those who are of low income. However, there is still a very strong libertarian streak in the way our government works, suggesting that some liberties (like the protections in the Bill of Rights) are so important that they cannot be submitted to the “common good”.

But I think VRB has figured out one of the reasons why it can be difficult for many non-libertarians to debate libertarians. It’s a question of first principles. There are a lot of arguments in favor of libertarianism, and there are a lot of arguments in favor of utilitarianism. There are great thinkers on both sides. But the two are completely different moral systems, with completely different ends. When I, as a libertarian, argue with a utilitarian, my appeals to liberty carry little weight. When a utilitarian argues with me, their appeals to the “common good” carry little weight. Most people in this country have been taught, through our wonderful public education system, that utility should trump liberty.

Now, that doesn’t mean that we cannot find some agreement. Many of us who are libertarians also believe that libertarian policies will work better than letting the government define the “common good” and enforce it. In essence, I believe that libertarianism is usually much more utilitarian than socialism. Libertarianism is the credo of the free market, and the free market has done much more to increase utility than socialism ever will, simply due to human nature. When arguing against something like universal health care, it can be attacked both due to its denial of freedom and due to the fact that it’s less likely to maximize utility than a free market approach.

But sometimes there must be a choice. Sometimes liberty and utility are at odds with each other. At that point, the question becomes who you trust. In society, the agent opposite liberty is government, and if you want to enforce a policy of maximizing utility, it is government that enforces that policy. I have very little faith in government to maximize utility, and thus I still choose liberty.

1 6 7 8 9 10 28