Freedom subsumes individual liberty and personal responsibility. If individuals are free to act and also held responsible to bear the consequences for their actions, good outcomes will be reinforce correct behavior and bad outcomes will provide a learning experience. When government gets in the way of this feedback loop, it prevents the development of virtue and merely subjects the individual to the will of the State.

As long as you do not harm others, you should be free to act. This is so because the only one who owns you is you. This is true no matter where an individual happens to be born. The differences of relative freedom we see for individuals born in different countries are a direct result of the level of burden the government on them. For example, an individual born in North Korea has the same rights as an individual born in Canada. The difference is that the North Korean government has usurped more of the individual’s rights. Imagine, if each nation were an individual, the parasite of government would put all into the hospital, and while some freer nations may be able to wheel around the corridors, many would be on life support. For those of us calling for freedom for ourselves and our kin—whether that is defined as family or as those within an arbitrary political boundary—we should not forget others who suffer under even more repressive states.

More freedom means more prosperity. As The Economic Freedom of the World Index shows year after year, those areas of the world with less burdensome governments have greater standards of living. This fact should quiet calls for more redistribution at the hands of the government or more invasive economic regulations, even by persons supportive of such programs out of concern for those in the lowest socio-economic groups. Promoting freedom means promoting the free movement of goods and people across borders, the abolishment of protectionist measures, and the end of occupational licensing laws, all of which create prosperity.

Freedom is positive! Throughout history various tactics have been used to grow movements. A dictator might campaign using fear tactics, telling folks that if he or she is not elected, there will be dire consequences. Contemporary politicians sell utopian visions, being purposefully vague so they cannot be held accountable for the shortcomings of their stated policies (which more often than not involve massive violations of individual rights). But the most successful movements have used truth, reason, and optimism as beacons. Just consider that since the philosophy of classical liberalism began to shape political regimes and societies starting with the founding of the United States in the 18th century, the world has seen economic growth and levels of prosperity hitherto unprecedented in history. That is why this movement will succeed—and why it must.

Previous | Next | All Memes (upcoming)

Post from: LibertarianChristians.com

Freedom: My Anti-Gov

Please support LCC by sharing this post on your favorite social network.

Tags: free market, liberty, rights

Related Content:

• Is Limited Government an Oxymoron? (1)
• Thoughts on Homeschooling (8)
• The Nobility of the Bourgeoisie (0)
• Students for Liberty Award (0)
• Religious Roots of Liberty (3)

The authors forum was great. I was impressed by Shawn Ritenour’s Foundations of Economics, which is essentially an econ textbook from a Christian perspective. He shows that the field of economics – from an Austrian point of view – is entirely coherent with Christianity. The book looks great for homeschoolers especially. I’m excited about this book and I hope to get a review copy soon. Jacob Huebert talked about his latest work, Libertarianism Today. It hasn’t been released yet, but the Mises Institute will be selling a less expensive paperback version and you should look out for it. I’ve known Huebert for a while and it was a pleasure seeing him again. Stephan Kinsella, another good friend of mine, talked about the festschrift (a volume of papers written by top specialists in honor of a major thinker) he and Guido Hulsmann put together in honor of Hans-Hermann Hoppe, called Property, Freedom and Society.

The topic of the afternoon session I attended was “Rothbard and the Pre-Austrians.” In other words, there are a number of interesting figures in history that approached ideas that took greater shape as the Austrian economists developed them. Joseph Weglarz gave a very interesting presentation on the great Catholic theologian Thomas Aquinas; his greatest accomplishment was a synthesis of faith and reason forming the basis of Scholasticism. Daniel Coleman gave an excellent, concise, and easily understandable talk on Aquinas’s favorite philosopher – Aristotle – and his conception of trade.

Gerard Casey gave the Lou Church Memorial Lecture on Religion and Economics. He talked about the formulation of “religions” out of the dominant philosophies of the day, such as scientism, environmentism (no, that is not a misspelling), and even economism/statism. These “religions” set themselves up in the place of God and subvert man’s ultimate purpose. He concluded with an excellent call to the church to abandon coercion based on our understanding of the Christian worldview.

Following a nice dinner, we concluded the day hanging out with fellow libertarians over drinks, talking philosophy, current events, economics, and general anti-state awesomeness. Can’t beat it…

Post from: LibertarianChristians.com

Austrian Scholars Conference 2010 – Day 1

Please support LCC by sharing this post on your favorite social network.

Tags: economics, events, Mises Institute

Related Content:

• Austrian Scholars Conference 2010 (2)
• Anybody else attending the Houston Mises Circle? (0)
• Mises Circle Houston Recap (1)
• Austrian Scholars Conference 2009 (7)
• Why the Free Market Rocks, Reason #497… (4)

• Robert Butler’s session on email marketing, which built on methods of attracting media attention via email and communicating effectively with supporters.
• Dawn Westerberg’s session on using social networking and blogging to communicate.
• Jeff McGhee’s session on building effective websites for candidates. This was particularly great since I am interested in freelancing for candidates who need help making websites that are attractive and easy to update. (Contact me for more info if you are interested!)

The dinner that evening was centered around a debate between five individuals who are running for the Chair position of the Libertarian National Committee. I was not personally acquainted with any of them before that day, but I got to know John Jay Mayers and Mark Hinkle a bit. Ernie Hancock was my fave of the night, but everybody had great things to say and I’m excited to see what’s going to happen with LP-National in the coming years. There is a big push from many people to stay the course of principled libertarianism rather than become Republican-lites or Tea Partyists. (Side note: the best word of the day was “Teo-cons”, ha!) I’m just glad to see that even though we can disagree on certain aspects of libertarian theory, we can be united behind “hating the state,” which is what is important in the long run.

But the biggest surprise for me was that the Libertarian Party of Texas presented me with their first “Student Libertarian of the Year Award,” for my work with the Libertarian Longhorns over the past few years and LibertarianChristians.com. This came with no warning and I was at a loss for words (I know, shocking). It was great to be nominated for the SFL award a few weeks ago, but to be recognized by your peers, your colleagues, and so many people that you admire – well, let’s just say it was touching. Many thanks to Pat Dixon, Robert Butler, Art DiBianca, Jim Lark, and the rest of the awesome crew of LP-Texas. My only proper response is to continue serving others via the cause of liberty, and we will make a difference!

Post from: LibertarianChristians.com

Post Event Recap of the Libertarian State Leadership Alliance

Please support LCC by sharing this post on your favorite social network.

Tags: events, Libertarian Party

Related Content:

• Students for Liberty Award (0)
• LP Texas Helps Defeat $1 Billion Scheme of Fake “Private Roads” (1)
• LP National Just Made Their Best Hiring Move EVER (0)
• Listen to the Students for Liberty Texas Conference LIVE on Saturday (0)
• Austrian Scholars Conference 2010 – Day 1 (2)

My wife and I will be attending the Austrian Scholars Conference this week at the Ludwig von Mises Institute. I’m really excited that one of my best buddies, Daniel Krawisz of the Libertarian Longhorns, will be presenting this year in a panel with Hans Herman Hoppe, M. Garrett Roth, Bernardita Escobar, and chaired by Thomas DiLorenzo. His talk is called “Praxeology of the Knowledge Problem of Socialism,” and he will be discussing the often-missed details of Hayek’s knowledge problem in the context of, you guessed it, Misesian praxeology (which is the logic of human action). If you want to tune in, you should be able to listen live on Mises.org sometime between 1:00 and 2:30pm CST on Saturday.

I’ll have some articles prepped to post late this week, and I’ll try to do a little summary post each day at some point. If any of you LCC readers are attending, let me know right now in the comments below. I really would love to meet you.

Post from: LibertarianChristians.com

Austrian Scholars Conference 2010

Please support LCC by sharing this post on your favorite social network.

Tags: economics, events, Mises Institute

Related Content:

• Austrian Scholars Conference 2010 – Day 1 (2)
• Anybody else attending the Houston Mises Circle? (0)
• Mises Circle Houston Recap (1)
• Austrian Scholars Conference 2009 (7)
• Why the Free Market Rocks, Reason #497… (4)

If a patron saint for the libertarian movement were to be chosen, at the top of the list would be Rev. Edmund A. Opitz, minister and theologian for liberty. He was a good friend of Murray Rothbard and many others in the freedom movement—he was present from the beginning and knew almost everyone. From the 1950s through the 1990s, Opitz called the church to an integrated understanding of religion, economics, and individual liberty. He passed away in 2006, creating a void yet to be filled but leaving this world much better than he had found it.Opitz trained for Christian ministry at Andover Seminary and initially ministered in the Unitarian Church. But during his early years of ministry Unitarianism became more and more influenced by liberal Protestantism and the social gospel, whereas Opitz consistently grew more theologically conservative. He eventually left the Unitarian Church for the Congregationalist denomination and continued to promote conservative values and a thoroughly free market outlook upon social life.

Religion, Opitz would say, is far more than an academic exercise in one subject among many others; rather it is the fundamental way one approaches, understands, and evaluates all subjects. One’s religion, or worldview, makes all the difference in how one interacts with the world. Opitz’s Christian faith led him to the realization that liberty was the only reasonable organizing principle for society. Liberty and faith are not merely compatible – they are inseparable. “Liberty rests upon the belief that all proper authority for man’s relationships with his fellow men comes from a source higher than man — from the Creator… Each person has a relation to his Maker with which no other person, not even the ruler, has any right to interfere.” Reciprocally, Opitz believed a philosophy of liberty presupposed a background of Christian philosophy. Whether or not one accepts this notion, certainly Western civilization is indebted to Christendom for the understanding that natural law provides an absolute rather than relative standard—that there is something higher than the whims of men.

Opitz understood this philosophy of liberty as the true meaning of individualism. He repeatedly emphasized the importance of individual liberty in religious conviction: “Men must be free in society because each person has a destiny beyond society which he can work out only under the conditions of liberty.” The concept of individualism is often lost in the modern church. One frequently hears in religious circles that “individualism has no place in the life of the church,” but this constitutes a misunderstanding of the word itself. At its core, individualism means the individual is responsible for his own actions, in particular before God, and thus individual liberty is necessary for living out the dictates of conscience. Opitz would agree that one cannot be in Christ (Galatians 3:28) without the body of Christ—the church—but many Christians take this much too far and find themselves promoting collectivism rather than community. Individualism is not social atomism: “We have no inclination to be hermits; we are social creatures, and we achieve our full humanity only in association, in mutuality, and in community.” Voluntary action is the very essence of community, and thus the collectivist is actually acting against the spirit of community he seeks to promote.

The natural outgrowth of holding a consistent philosophy of political liberty is supporting a free market economy. Opitz understood that the free market was absolutely essential to maintaining a free society. “Economic freedom is to be cherished for itself, just as we cherish every one of our liberties. But economic freedom is doubly important because it sustains all the rest [of our liberties]… Economic freedom represents our livelihood, and whoever controls our livelihood has acquired critical leverage over every other aspect of our lives as well.” In this insight, Opitz recognized that Christianity, which mandates a free society where individuals can peacefully fulfill their responsibilities before God, and capitalism, which supports and maintains the free society, are not enemies in the least. Rather, they are critical allies, the best of friends. Opitz elaborates upon this topic at length in his appropriately titled book, Religion and Capitalism: Allies, Not Enemies.

But how can individual freedom be protected from tyranny? The solution, according to Opitz, lies in returning to classical-liberal political ideals. “There is a place for government in the affairs of men, and our Declaration of Independence tells us precisely what that place is. The role of government is to protect individuals in their God-given individual rights. Freedom is the natural birthright of man, but all that government can do in behalf of freedom is to let the individual alone, and it should secure him in his rights by making others let him alone.” Thus, if government is to have any purpose at all, it is only to secure the rights of individuals in their persons and property. Anything else is nothing short of criminal, for the standard of morality does not change when one dons a government uniform. Opitz saw the American governmental system as a unique solution in the history of man that had yet to be matched. To him, minimal government was the best way to restrain tyranny.

With these principles in mind, it is no surprise that Opitz was patently opposed to the so-called “social gospel” that was popular in the church for much of the 20th century. The central tenet of the social gospel was that the chief function of the church was to provide for the physical needs of the destitute by all possible means. Though charity is indeed a great part of the Christian way of life, social-gospel activists in effect renounced charity and condoned the use of force to achieve their meta-goals of social and economic equality through government programs and wealth transfer. Opitz’s keen outlook history and philosophy led him to write scathing critiques of the actions of social-gospel proponents, and in many respects he single-handedly turned much of the tide against this deviant theological point of view. (See his book The Libertarian Theology of Freedom for an excellent history of the social gospel.)

Opitz’s strong belief in freedom was coupled with action. Early in his career, he helped form and manage a group called Spiritual Mobilization, which disseminated newsletters promoting free-market ideas to over 20,000 ministers nationwide. Following the dissolution of Spiritual Mobilization, Opitz joined the Foundation for Economic Education (FEE) as a senior staff member (and resident theologian). While at FEE, he founded the Nockian Society, which helped keep Albert Jay Nock’s writings in print, and “the Remnant,” a small fellowship of conservative and libertarian ministers named after the theme of Nock’s essay “Isaiah’s Job.” He spent 37 years at FEE, retiring in 1992.

He made a great impact upon the libertarian movement through his writing. The paper trail of his thoughts is voluminous. While a part of Spiritual Mobilization, Opitz was a frequent contributor to the magazine Faith and Freedom. He left an indelible mark upon FEE’s publication, The Freeman, with his numerous book reviews and articles. Religion and Capitalism is considered a classic text in both economics and theology. His manner of writing matched his manner of person—gentlemanly, persuasive, and humble—worthy traits that all libertarians should emulate.

Opitz could see the ramifications of the war of ideas that has been fought for centuries between liberty and tyranny. He saw the trajectories of the prominent ideas of his day—social gospel, collectivism, socialistic economic policy—and he used his abilities to promote what was good and right. “With how little wisdom do we organize our lives, especially in the areas of government and the economy. We’ve been going by dead reckoning for too long, and our dumb luck has just about run out,” he wrote in the August 1992 Freeman. Libertarian Christians should remember that Opitz helped pave the way for us to make a difference. Let us honor his legacy by telling Christians in America the answer to the problems society faces is not the State, but rather liberty and faith.

If you agree with the mission of YAL and other organizations teaching students about the virtues of liberty, please consider donating to the cause today!

Post from: LibertarianChristians.com

Edmund Opitz – Minister to Liberty

Please support LCC by sharing this post on your favorite social network.

Tags: christian libertarian, Christianity, Edmund Opitz, individualism, libertarian christian, philosophy, theology, YAL

Related Content:

• The Libertarian Theology of Freedom (28)
• The Humongous Page of Libertarian Resources (12)
• Summer Reading – Top 10 books that you should drop everything to read now… (1)
• Religious Roots of Liberty (3)
• Defending Freedom and the Free Society (0)

Free trade exists when governments do not interfere with commercial transactions between individuals domestically and internationally. Free trade makes America and the world better off. The Institute for International Economics has calculated that completely liberalizing trade would add $500 billion, or $5,000 per household, to U.S. annual income. And, the World Bank has estimated that reducing trade restrictions would add an additional $350 billion in income for developing countries and $170 billion in income for developed countries by 2015.

Free trade is fair trade. Free trade is fair because it is voluntary and mutually beneficial. People trade the things they value less for the things they value more. For instance, I trade my money with IBM for a laptop computer. In doing so, both IBM and I are better off. An involuntary or disadvantageous trade is not a trade but coercion. Free trade is also fair because it promotes competition and innovation. In a global market there are more producers and consumers. With more producers there is more competition; and with more consumers production can take place on a large scale. More competition and large scale production lead to more innovation and lower prices, and thus to higher standards of living.

Free trade is efficient. Individuals engage in trade due to differences in comparative advantage. No one place has all the resources, such as raw materials, knowledge and skill, to produce most efficiently all the goods and services it needs. There is a reason, for example, that bananas are grown in Honduras and not Iceland. So, countries specialize in what they produce best and trade with one another to acquire what they either cannot produce at all or only inefficiently. Hence, free trade lets countries make more efficient use of resources.

Free trade increases prosperity worldwide. Throughout history, most humans lived in utter poverty. However, since the Industrial Revolution, per capita income worldwide has increased dramatically. According to economist Johan Norberg, just since 1965 Western countries have increased their wealth by 40 percent. The increase was even higher on the poorer continents: Latin America raised its wealth by 60 percent, Africa by 80 percent, and the average income in Asia rose by 300 percent. According to World Bank studies, global poverty rates fell from 33 percent to 18 percent between 1981 and 2001; poverty in East Asia fell from 58 to 16 percent and in South Asia from 52 to 31 percent. This kind of economic growth seems best explained by the motto “A rising tide lifts all ships.” Economic growth is fueled by investments in stocks, non-government bonds, real estate, or businesses, because such investments pay for new technology and new jobs. Global free trade increases investments from developed countries into underdeveloped and developing countries, and vice versa.

Free trade fosters peace. Humans naturally seek to want to improve their condition. In order to obtain what they need, they can either trade, enslave others to produce for them, or go to war and loot land and resources from the defeated. For much of human history, the pursuit of the latter two options prevailed; but trade dominates today. Over the past half century, the incidence of war and civil conflicts has steadily declined. .To be sure, trade is not a sufficient condition for peace, but it is a necessary one. Trade contributes to a country’s internal stability by raising incomes significantly more and across all sectors of society than slavery or war and by reducing poverty. Trade also encourages democratization and democratic countries are less likely to engage in war. Finally, the more trade takes place among countries, the higher the economic cost becomes to go to war since war would destroy the trade relations and investments already made.

Free trade helps the world’s poorest. Free trade facilitates economic growth. In turn, economic growth leads to higher living standards, lower infant mortality rates, increased average life expectancy, improved health, decreased hunger, greater access to drinking water, and increased literacy. Global trade improves these indicators for the world’s poorest, as Norberg’s research shows. For instance, he writes that hunger in developing countries has been reduced from 37 to 17 percent over the last 30 years. Calorie consumption actually rose fastest in the developing countries, from 1,932 calories a day in 1961 to 2,684 calories a day in 1999. Whereas 25 years ago, 90 percent of the world’s rural population had no access to clean water, today it is only 20 percent. And, in 1950, the developing world’s illiteracy rate was 70 percent; today it is only 23 percent.

Protectionism hurts individuals in poor countries. When governments impose import tariffs, quotas and hand out subsidies to protect domestic industries from foreign competition, they keep prices high and stifle economic development. This is particularly detrimental to poor countries. For instance, American cotton farmers receive an average of US $250,000 in subsidies, which keeps the price of cotton high for consumers and prevent producers in poorer countries like Burkina Faso from growing their economy by selling cotton in America. According the Fraser Institute’s 2007 report on economic freedom, the average per capita GDP of countries in the top quartile of economic freedom is $26,013, whereas that of countries in the lowest quartile is only $3,305. Free trade must occur in the absence of government intervention , but many so-called “free trade agreements” are riddled with subsidies, quotas and other protectionist elements.

Previous | Next | All Memes (upcoming)

Post from: LibertarianChristians.com

Free Trade Now!

Please support LCC by sharing this post on your favorite social network.

Tags: economics, free market, free trade

Related Content:

• The Nobility of the Bourgeoisie (0)
• Perspectives on Religion and Capitalism (2)
• Mises Circle Houston Recap (1)
• Is Limited Government an Oxymoron? (1)
• Economics Has the Answer: What’s the Question? (0)

The Texas Declaration of Independence

The Unanimous Declaration of Independence made by the Delegates of the People of Texas in General Convention at the town of Washington on the 2nd day of March 1836.

When a government has ceased to protect the lives, liberty and property of the people, from whom its legitimate powers are derived, and for the advancement of whose happiness it was instituted, and so far from being a guarantee for the enjoyment of those inestimable and inalienable rights, becomes an instrument in the hands of evil rulers for their oppression.

When the Federal Republican Constitution of their country, which they have sworn to support, no longer has a substantial existence, and the whole nature of their government has been forcibly changed, without their consent, from a restricted federative republic, composed of sovereign states, to a consolidated central military despotism, in which every interest is disregarded but that of the army and the priesthood, both the eternal enemies of civil liberty, the ever-ready minions of power, and the usual instruments of tyrants.

When, long after the spirit of the constitution has departed, moderation is at length so far lost by those in power, that even the semblance of freedom is removed, and the forms themselves of the constitution discontinued, and so far from their petitions and remonstrances being regarded, the agents who bear them are thrown into dungeons, and mercenary armies sent forth to force a new government upon them at the point of the bayonet.

When, in consequence of such acts of malfeasance and abdication on the part of the government, anarchy prevails, and civil society is dissolved into its original elements. In such a crisis, the first law of nature, the right of self-preservation, the inherent and inalienable rights of the people to appeal to first principles, and take their political affairs into their own hands in extreme cases, enjoins it as a right towards themselves, and a sacred obligation to their posterity, to abolish such government, and create another in its stead, calculated to rescue them from impending dangers, and to secure their future welfare and happiness.

Nations, as well as individuals, are amenable for their acts to the public opinion of mankind. A statement of a part of our grievances is therefore submitted to an impartial world, in justification of the hazardous but unavoidable step now taken, of severing our political connection with the Mexican people, and assuming an independent attitude among the nations of the earth.

The Mexican government, by its colonization laws, invited and induced the Anglo-American population of Texas to colonize its wilderness under the pledged faith of a written constitution, that they should continue to enjoy that constitutional liberty and republican government to which they had been habituated in the land of their birth, the United States of America.

In this expectation they have been cruelly disappointed, inasmuch as the Mexican nation has acquiesced in the late changes made in the government by General Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna, who having overturned the constitution of his country, now offers us the cruel alternative, either to abandon our homes, acquired by so many privations, or submit to the most intolerable of all tyranny, the combined despotism of the sword and the priesthood.

It has sacrificed our welfare to the state of Coahuila, by which our interests have been continually depressed through a jealous and partial course of legislation, carried on at a far distant seat of government, by a hostile majority, in an unknown tongue, and this too, notwithstanding we have petitioned in the humblest terms for the establishment of a separate state government, and have, in accordance with the provisions of the national constitution, presented to the general Congress a republican constitution, which was, without just cause, contemptuously rejected.

It incarcerated in a dungeon, for a long time, one of our citizens, for no other cause but a zealous endeavor to procure the acceptance of our constitution, and the establishment of a state government.

It has failed and refused to secure, on a firm basis, the right of trial by jury, that palladium of civil liberty, and only safe guarantee for the life, liberty, and property of the citizen.

It has failed to establish any public system of education, although possessed of almost boundless resources, (the public domain,) and although it is an axiom in political science, that unless a people are educated and enlightened, it is idle to expect the continuance of civil liberty, or the capacity for self government.

It has suffered the military commandants, stationed among us, to exercise arbitrary acts of oppression and tyrrany, thus trampling upon the most sacred rights of the citizens, and rendering the military superior to the civil power.

It has dissolved, by force of arms, the state Congress of Coahuila and Texas, and obliged our representatives to fly for their lives from the seat of government, thus depriving us of the fundamental political right of representation.

It has demanded the surrender of a number of our citizens, and ordered military detachments to seize and carry them into the Interior for trial, in contempt of the civil authorities, and in defiance of the laws and the constitution.

It has made piratical attacks upon our commerce, by commissioning foreign desperadoes, and authorizing them to seize our vessels, and convey the property of our citizens to far distant ports for confiscation.

It denies us the right of worshipping the Almighty according to the dictates of our own conscience, by the support of a national religion, calculated to promote the temporal interest of its human functionaries, rather than the glory of the true and living God.

It has demanded us to deliver up our arms, which are essential to our defense, the rightful property of freemen, and formidable only to tyrannical governments.

It has invaded our country both by sea and by land, with intent to lay waste our territory, and drive us from our homes; and has now a large mercenary army advancing, to carry on against us a war of extermination.

It has, through its emissaries, incited the merciless savage, with the tomahawk and scalping knife, to massacre the inhabitants of our defenseless frontiers.

It hath been, during the whole time of our connection with it, the contemptible sport and victim of successive military revolutions, and hath continually exhibited every characteristic of a weak, corrupt, and tyrannical government.

These, and other grievances, were patiently borne by the people of Texas, until they reached that point at which forbearance ceases to be a virtue. We then took up arms in defense of the national constitution. We appealed to our Mexican brethren for assistance. Our appeal has been made in vain. Though months have elapsed, no sympathetic response has yet been heard from the Interior. We are, therefore, forced to the melancholy conclusion, that the Mexican people have acquiesced in the destruction of their liberty, and the substitution therefore of a military government; that they are unfit to be free, and incapable of self government.

The necessity of self-preservation, therefore, now decrees our eternal political separation.

We, therefore, the delegates with plenary powers of the people of Texas, in solemn convention assembled, appealing to a candid world for the necessities of our condition, do hereby resolve and declare, that our political connection with the Mexican nation has forever ended, and that the people of Texas do now constitute a free, Sovereign, and independent republic, and are fully invested with all the rights and attributes which properly belong to independent nations; and, conscious of the rectitude of our intentions, we fearlessly and confidently commit the issue to the decision of the Supreme arbiter of the destinies of nations.

Post from: LibertarianChristians.com

Happy Texas Independence Day!

Please support LCC by sharing this post on your favorite social network.

Tags: Austin, freedom, government, history, individualism, Texas

Related Content:

• What We Can Learn from Spaghetti Sauce (2)
• Top 10 Books for Christian Libertarians – 2009 Edition (3)
• Texas Independence Day 2009 (0)
• Religious Roots of Liberty (3)
• Mises Circle Houston Recap (1)

Capitalism is the only moral social system. Only a capitalist system allows you to act in your own interest, to keep what you have worked for and trade it with other willing individuals. For much of human history, wealth has been produced primarily by looting or enslaving others. Under capitalism wealth is created by serving others, by creating values for them. Individuals who produce the best goods and services are rewarded by making the most profit. Those who produce shoddy goods, mediocre services or try to defraud others are weeded out when exposed.

Capitalism is win-win. Producers only make profits on goods and services that consumers choose to buy. Competition among producers ensures that consumers have a variety of goods and services at different price ranges to choose from. Workers and employers come together based on mutual consent. Employers can choose to fire incompetent workers, and workers can choose to leave an employer for a better job. Competition among employers for qualified workers drives wages and benefits up. Whereas politics is a zero-sum game in which power and tax dollars are redistributed from one group to another, capitalism continuously creates more wealth, thereby growing the pie and increasing prosperity for all.

Capitalism is fair. Capitalism is predicated upon and respects individuals’ free choices. No one has to pay for what he does not want and derives no benefit from. Under capitalism, individuals and businesses cannot seek politically enforced advantages or handouts. For instance, in a capitalist system steel producers would not be able to obtain tariffs and subsidies in order to avoid being undersold or driven out of business by foreign competitors, and a workers’ union could not get government to force employers to provide higher wages, more benefits and greater job security. Unable to run to the government for help, these groups must prove themselves entirely based on the worth of the goods and services they produce. That is fair to consumers and competitors.

Capitalism empowers the consumer. The consumer votes for or against goods and services with his money. If companies do not offer the kinds of goods and services consumers want to buy, they fail — but their demise inspires the emergence of new markets, new products, new services, and new methods of production. In this way, capitalism promotes innovation and efficiency through a process of creative destruction. Capitalism also fosters the creation of mass communication tools such as the internet. Thus, consumers can make informed decisions about what to purchase and can let others know about the quality of that purchase. Many consumers united together can persuade a producer to lower prices or change his product or service for the better.

Capitalism reflects human nature. People have limited knowledge. State-planned economies fail because no bureaucrat or committee, no matter how well educated in economics, has the knowledge to coordinate the actions of millions of individuals. People are also motivated by different values. Under capitalism people can pursue their chosen values, provided of course that they do not violate the rights of others. Pursuing values and being allowed to keep, dispose of and profit from the results of that pursuit motivates people to take care of things, to produce, and to innovate. Further, by tapping into human beings’ competitive nature, capitalism makes everything better. Just compare the best car created under a capitalist system to the best car created under a socialist system, where competition is suppressed.

Capitalism fosters benevolence. When individuals are well-off, as would be the case for the bulk of individuals under capitalism (perhaps only those currently receiving special treatment from some government body would be the exception), they have time and money to take care of others. Further, if they have the right to keep what they have worked for and dispose of it in the way they choose, they are more likely to embrace helping people in need and give more than if their money is forcibly taken from them by the government via taxation. For instance, you might already donate money to your local homeless shelter, food pantry or to an organization working for a cause that is very important to you. But if you were not taxed as heavily as you are, you might be willing and able to donate more.

Capitalism makes everyone richer. Even the least well-off person in a developed country today lives a life of luxury beyond the wildest dreams of the richest kings centuries ago: consider televisions, computers, iPods, cell phones, microwaves, cars, washing machines, or air conditioning. Compare how poor people live in the United States today to how they lived in the US a hundred years ago, or to how they live in Third World countries today. In fact, capitalism is our best hope for alleviating and eventually eradicating poverty worldwide because it creates more wealth — for everyone — than any other social system.

Capitalism promotes peace. Capitalist countries are less likely than non-capitalist countries to initiate violence against their citizens or against other countries. Where people come together for mutually beneficial interaction such as trade, issues of race, religion, ethnicity, gender, or sexual orientation are less important. What matters is whether you can offer me the kinds of goods and services I want for the price I am willing to pay.

Previous | Next | All Memes (upcoming)

Post from: LibertarianChristians.com

Enjoy Capitalism!

Please support LCC by sharing this post on your favorite social network.

Tags: capitalism, economics, memes, money, morality, socialism, trade

Related Content:

• Economics Has the Answer: What’s the Question? (0)
• Churches and the Social Order (0)
• What are we so worried about again? (3)
• Universal Health Care is the new Post Office (3)
• The Nobility of the Bourgeoisie (0)

Sooooooo, one more milestone down, about 250 experiments more to go. Better get cracking. Anyway, yay for me, blah blah blah. I’m excited.

Post from: LibertarianChristians.com

One more step toward a PhD…

Please support LCC by sharing this post on your favorite social network.

Tags: education, science

Related Content:

• What is man, that you are mindful of him? (1)
• The Liberating Arts (1)
• Taking the week off from recording the Christianity and War Audiobook… (0)
• Speedlinking and fun stuff for January 16 (1)
• My ASC 2009 talk is now available! (7)

A well-functioning environment adds to the welfare of human beings. Most people want to breathe fresh air and drink clean water; to relax in abundant parks and green forests; and to observe wildlife in their natural habitats. These same folks think that a diversity of plants and animals is important and are awed and inspired by the sheer beauty of untouched places of nature. But human beings also need to survive, and for that they need the resources nature has to offer. Keeping the environment in good shape while still utilizing its resources for the well-being of humanity is a complex and challenging task. Yet, to decrease the world’s population, to oppose technology, or to call for governments to pass new laws and mandates is not the solution. Government policies cannot mimic the dynamism and spontaneity present in the market, and, in fact, more often than not create perverse and unintended consequences. The solution to environmental concerns is not for more government intervention but for the application of a free market approach, which encapsulates entrepreneurship, property rights, and voluntary transactions.

Why using free markets to solve environmental problems makes the most sense: Free markets best allocate scarce resources. Free markets are based on property rights. When a resource is held in common and owned by no one in particular, people tend to exploit it because they want to get the most out of it before everyone else. For example, when a forest is held in common (i.e. anyone can use it) you will try to log as many trees as you can, before the next person comes along. That person will think the same way you do, and the next person, etc., until eventually all trees are logged. And, you have no reason to plant new trees because you have no control over who logs them. On the other hand, if you own the forest, then you have control over its use and an incentive to preserve the value you derive from it. So, you might replace the trees you log because your forest is a long-term investment for your business success. Or, you might even decide that logging is not as profitable and make your forest a recreation spot, where people pay a fee to camp, hike and enjoy nature. Property rights also give you the ability to defend yourself against polluters and hold them accountable for their actions. For instance, in England and Scotland, if you are a commercial fisher or sport angler, you own fishing rights; if a factory pollutes the waters you fish in, you can seek relief in court. Privately held fishing rights also prevent the depletion of fish because fishers want to stay in business and thus have a vested interest not to over fish. So, clearly a system of private, rather than public ownership, better protects resources.

Free markets can better increase standards of living and protect the environment. Some radical environmentalists are opposed to the flourishing and advancement of human life because they believe that the progress of humans necessarily entails the destruction of nature. They would prefer the destruction of industrial civilization and the eradication of most of mankind. Most people rightly find this position morally abhorrent. Of course, we have to take into consideration that natural resources are not unlimited and that we cannot gratuitously destroy nature since we rely on it for our well-being. The answer lies in technology. Technological innovation arises out of the quest of producers to use resources more efficiently and effectively. But there is little incentive for innovation if people can’t derive any profit from their labor. The free market spurs innovation because it is based on voluntary action and exchange, and it provides the proper incentives. For instance, consider digitalization. It was driven by a quest of producers and consumers to speed up communication and save costs by reducing the use of paper and the use of energy in connection with the production and use of paper, such as the energy needed to log trees, transport and process the wood, make paper and print books, transport paper and paper products to office supply stores and books to local bookstores, etc.

Digitalization was a win-win for humans and trees. Pollution and unsustainable exploitation of natural materials can be solved by technological innovation. In fact, innovation often actually reduces the use of raw materials derived from nature. In his book The Population Bomb, Paul Ehrlich argued that the growth of the world’s population would soon outpace the supply of food and resources. So, in 1980 Julian Simon made a famous wager with Ehrlich on how the prices of various commodity metals would change over the next 10 years up to 1990 (a price increase would reflect scarcity in supply). Simon bet the prices would go down, Ehrlich bet that the prices would go up. Even though the world’s population experienced the largest increase in history during the 1980s, the prices of all the metals the two men had bet on went down and Simon won the wager.

Government environmental regulations fail. Market failure, as is often alleged, is not the problem. The problem is that governments prevent or meddle with markets for natural resources. And, whereas markets punish or reward businesses with profits and losses, bureaucrats are not held accountable in the same way. They incur no punishment for wasting resources or reward for using them efficiently; they get to keep their jobs either way. As a result, government environmental regulations usually either fail outright or incur unintended consequences. Consider the case of scenic areas such as parks and forest preserves. When they are owned by the government, user fees are kept so low (by taxing folks who may never visit the park) that private owners are not able to compete and thus don’t consider it profitable to own a scenic area. And, government owned parks are often less well maintained. At the beginning of the 20th century, Seattle, WA had a privately owned park that was beautifully maintained and enjoyed by thousands of people every day. But the local government decided that it would not take the risk of the next private owner being less attentive to the park. Shortly after it condemned and took over the property, the park’s condition deteriorated. Another example of failed environmental regulation is the Endangered Species Act (ESA) which says that if you have an endangered species on your land, you face stringent regulations as to how (if at all) you can use it. This has resulted in the 3-S treatment (shoot, shovel, and shut-up) to avoid regulations imposed by the government.

Government ownership of property causes more pollution. If public ownership of natural resources, scenic areas, and watersheds is such a good idea, why don’t environmentalists point to examples of such utopias under communist regimes (where private property was abolished?) Because communist countries, absent of free markets, have been some of the worst environmental offenders. In many Eastern bloc countries factory fumes caused the death of entire forests. Whole water bodies, such as the Aral and Caspian Seas, were contaminated with factory waste or diverted for irrigation, destroying the natural habitat of many species of plant and animals. The air pollution was often so bad that people had to drive with their lights on during the day to see the road, and the lack of clean air caused major health problems. About communist China, Thomas DiLorenzo writes in the March 1992 issue of The Freeman: “Depletion of government-owned forests has turned them into deserts, and millions of acres of grazing and farm land in the northern Chinese plains were made alkaline and unproductive during the ‘Great Leap Forward’ [of 1958 to 1960].” Similarly, in the United States, the public sector, meaning government, has been a major source of pollution. The Department of Defense produces 750,000 tons of hazardous waste each year—more than what the five largest private chemical companies in the U.S. produce combined.

Previous | Next | All Memes (upcoming)

Post from: LibertarianChristians.com

Earth Liberation

Please support LCC by sharing this post on your favorite social network.

Tags: economics, environment, free market, memes, regulations

Related Content:

• Why the Free Market Rocks, Reason #497… (4)
• Who Else Wants to Be a Good Steward? (1)
• The Nobility of the Bourgeoisie (0)
• Perspectives on Religion and Capitalism (2)
• Obama’s First 100 Days: Madmen, Blunders, Death Defined (1)