A Joyous Moment

I was telling my wife about a radio interview I heard recently.  A woman (an economics professor, of all people) was talking about the problems associated with 401(k) plans, and how they don’t work: they don’t give people the returns and the money they need to enjoy a good quality of life.  Instead of putting the blame on government-erected obstacles to high returns and stability of income, the blame was put on individuals for being unable to plan their retirement well.

The answer, of course, lies with a government-run pension fund.  Why not?  All the European countries are doing it.  Why not us?  The rationale she gave was that governments are more stable than Wall Street companies.

When I said this, my wife wisecracked, “That’s because the government can keep stealing,” or words to that effect.  To hear her equate government taxation with theft (a libertarian ideology) was great!  Honestly, I have a hard time saying that taxation is theft.  For me, to do so is to state the illegitimacy of government.  I’m not quite ready to do that yet.

But for my wife, a sociology-trained working class young woman, who leaned to the left for some time, to utter a statement that strikes at the core of libertarian belief was a joyous moment for me! 

She sees that government as destructive and barrier-building, rather than constructive and helpful, as it purports to be.  She sees how much income tax and SS tax and Medicare tax is deducted from each and every paycheck (not to mention state and local taxes).  She sees firsthand how individuals waste government welfare money.  She sees the insanity associated with warrantless searches, pre-emptive war, wasteful government programs, etc.  She sees all of this and draws the same conclusions that I would.

She is, in short, changing to become a libertarian (a classical liberal; that philosophy which characterized the political beliefs of the founders).  It is wonderful and refreshing on many levels to see someone I love believe very closely to what I believe. 

Self-reliance, individual liberty, de-regulation, minimal taxation, and an emphasis on voluntary participation in voluntary organizations is the order of the day.  Appropriating more taxpayer dollars into a bloated and ever-expanding government apparatus will not lead to moral, economic, or societal progress!

Anatomy of a Parade

I went to a local Fourth of July parade on Friday. It was an interesting experience.

Like many American parades, there were large groups of people clustered together, some in lawn or camping chairs, to watch the festivities. Some children had plastic bags to catch the candy thrown to them. The smokers politely stayed in the back (largely), in an apparently voluntary gesture. They probably wanted to avoid the dirty looks or unpleasant encounters.

When the parade started, the first ten or fifteen minutes was led by a procession of military vehicles. Yes, there were a few veterans, but mostly, just military vehicles. One had a roughly fifteen-year-old boy air firing a loud machine gun mounted on the back of a jeep. I’m surprised my ears still aren’t ringing. There were amphibious vehicles, troop carriers, ambulances, etc.

This made me wonder: what are we looking at? What is being cheering for? To me, I am supportive of commemorating and remembering the sacrifices of soldiers for their country, and for freedom. But this was different. This was a showcase of the weapons of war, of the instruments of destruction, and even a celebration of them.

Bring the veterans along in peaceful clothes and peaceful vehicles. I honor their sacrifices and commitments. I honor the freedoms and liberties many of them believe they are fighting for (even if the conflict seems antagonistic to those interests to me personally). But I have a hard time with a celebration of military might and strength and power and force. I am not pleased with offensive weaponry. I do not want to celebrate it.

The Fourth of July to me means freedom from tyranny, oppression, and brutality, not because of American military might, but because of the American spirit of freedom (I am hopeful it still exists). Show me this spirit of freedom!

Instead, we were treated (after the military vehicles) to a long stream of campaign and politician’s vehicles. On the Fourth of July, I do not want to celebrate the many ways government is taking my tax dollars from me. I’d rather forget it, if I could. Instead, there was a group of Obama supporters, and seemingly dozens of campaign vehicles: vote so-and-so for Treasurer, or support so-and-so for State Representative, or County Clerk, or sheriff, etc.  (I wouldn’t have felt any more favorable if the supporters were for Sen. McCain instead of Sen. Obama.)

Politicizing the Fourth of July may seem innocuous to many (or most), but uncomfortable to me.

Instead, I’d rather see scores of voluntary groups and associations, celebration of family, tradition, religion, and our way of life. If that’s not enough, then perhaps banners with abstract terms like “Liberty” and “Freedom” and “Down with Tyranny” would be fine with me.

But for goodness sakes, avoid the celebration of American military might and habitual political pandering that characterizes politics on all levels these days. Make the Fourth something meaningful!

Who Killed the Constitution? and A Recession’s Value

Two excellent articles on lewrockwell.com today deserve my hearty recommendation.

This one is author Thomas Woods’ discussion of his new book, “Who Killed the Constitution?”  The premise is that the Constitution has taken a beating since World War I.  Blaming George W. Bush while giving people like FDR and Harry Truman, among others, a nod of approval is inconsistent.  The American Presidency, as well as the judiciary and legislative branches, are plagued with constitutional problems that continue until this day. 

As Tom Woods puts it, “Our book states the obvious: the United States government today is restrained not by the Constitution but simply by a sense of what it can get away with.”  I find that terribly accurate.

Lew Rockwell wrote this wonderful article about economics and the value of a recession.  Why is it valuable?  It helps us re-think our economic framework and mindset.  After all, from an economic standpoint, what is a government good for but to impede progress and erect barriers?

Unfortunately, this perspective is lost on many.  Government is still seen as the great solution to the world’s problems.  AIDS?  Pollution?  Poverty?  Greed?  Immorality?  (The list is apparently endless.)  Get the government involved and the problems go away, right?  So the common thinking goes.  Hopefully, tough times give us the motivation and desire to re-think these terribly flawed perspectives in favor of one that makes rational sense, and is historically and ethically consistent.

In Praise of the Internet

Might I say a few words in praise of the internet?  In this time to celebrate American independence from tyranny (like tax increases and occupying armies) , I feel that the internet is one global area where liberty and freedom reign.

Consider the fruits of liberty!  In just a few short years, the internet went from almost nothing to a huge and growing community of individuals.  What do these individuals do?

They talk to each other.  They buy and sell goods.  They share pictures.  They play games together.  They research and read and entertain themselves.

Consider the treasure troves available on the internet.  It literally contains the world’s largest (and cheapest) art gallery, movie theater, and library, in subjects of all flavors and varieties.  Those are just a few of the things the internet offers.

To me, the internet represents freedom at its best, and its worst.  Yes, there is a dark side.  There is pornography.  There are scams.  Predators do use chat rooms.  Violence, hatred, and strife do abound in areas.

But how is this any different than the world we live in?  There are good parts and there are bad parts: those places that are safe and those that are not; those that are moral and those that are not; those that are inviting and those that are not; those that are friendly and those that are not.

The internet links the world to itself (and links us to each other) in a beautifully decentralized, voluntary, complex, liberating, free (both in the liberty and complimentary sense) and incredibly diverse way.  It includes all of the bad but also all of the good that is in the world.  It is the most useful of resources, and one of the greatest (and transformative) technological miracles in our lifetime.

When I praise the internet, I am praising individuals acting freely.  I am praising the things that make us different, and that which makes us the same.  I am praising freedom and liberty, and their fruits.  Long live the internet, and long live freedom!

More Thoughts on Mosiah 29 and Kingship

Mosiah chapter 29 discusses kingship.

King Mosiah II teaches in 29:13 that

If it were possible that you could have just men to be your kings, who would establish the laws of God, and judge this people according to his commandments…then it would be expedient that ye should always have kings to rule over you.

But he ultimately says, “Because all men are not just it is not expedient that ye should have a king or kings to rule over you.” The idea of kings (rather than a single king) to rule over one would indicate some sort of absolute oligarchy, where a very small number of individuals rule as kings, perhaps following the Lamanite model (i.e. Lamoni and his father). In the Lamanite model (see, for instance, Alma 20), it appears different kings ruled over different geographical areas, with one king as ruler over the whole land, and the other kings serving under him.

Mosiah explains and reiterates the plaguing problems with a wicked king:

“How much iniquity doth one wicked king cause to be committed, yea, and what great destruction!”

He brings up the example (fresh in their minds, no doubt) of king Noah, and the resulting bondage and destruction. Mosiah continues in 29:21-23:

“Ye cannot dethrone an iniquitous king save it be through much contention, and the shedding of much blood.”

Why is this? One reason is that he is hard to get to: “For behold, he has his friends in iniquity, and he keepeth his guards about him.”

Under a just set of laws, a ruler might be deposed peacefully. Not in the case of a wicked king. Instead, the wicked ruler destroys past laws (especially the good ones) and makes his own based on his wicked whims. Those who do not obey his laws are destroyed. Mosiah then says, “Thus an unrighteous king doth pervert the ways of all righteousness.” He leads by destruction, by coercion, by compulsion, and at his own whim, rather than following the will of God, or even some shade of godliness such as commonly accepted transcendent principles. Quite the perversion!

And then a summary statement in verse 24: “It is not expedient that such abominations should come upon you.”

He later talks about an accountability issue. He writes:

The sins of many people have been caused by the iniquities of their kings; therefore their iniquities are answered upon the heads of their kings. And now I desire that this inequality should be no more in this land, especially among this my people; but I desire that this land be a land of liberty, and every man may enjoy his rights and privileges alike.

Hence, the problem with wicked kings.

Mosiah also discusses problems with righteous kings, explaining the king’s

“Travails of soul for [his] people, and also all the murmurings of the people to their king…he told them that these things ought not to be; but that the burden should come upon all the people, that every man might bear his part.”

Problems with righteous kings and wicked kings translate to a system of no kings, but one of arbitration (or mediation) by judge.  We later read in the Book of Mormon about laws set up by kings (i.e. Alma chapter 1) being followed by the judges.  It does not appear that this set of judges had significant legislative ability.  Instead, they were granted limited powers of mediation and adjudication, and a corresponding charge to execute the laws already established.  We see this in Alma 1 and Alma 30, for instance.

In summary, Mosiah chapter 29 discusses the problems of kingship and concludes that for the Nephite government at the time, a new system of judges would most effectively govern the people.