I am interested in all aspects of science and technology, economics and social solutions. Alone each is useless and makes no impact. Together we have the tools to feed billions, banish war and disease. With this blog I hope to make a small contribution. Expect also a little science fiction and some theology.
preamble attacks libertarianism solidly with an army of straw men.
1.“So our first hypocrisy test question is, Are
unions, political parties, elections, and social movements like
Occupy examples of “spontaneous order”—and if not, why not?”
Yes but there are alternative now to each: Employment and 'temp'
agencies, Charitable clubs and Crowd funding that can and do get things
done without waiting for the political process. And Ironically Occupy
was funded in part though Assurance Contracts which were invented by libertarians as
an alternative to taxing anyone. [Generally the first thing banned
by a socialist government are employment and temp agencies that
compete with unions. The second thing regulated to death are
charities that compete with government welfare.]
“Which gets us to our next test question Is
a libertarian willing to admit that production is the result of many
forces, each of which should be recognized and rewarded?”
No many markets not many forces. Labour is marketed and justly
recognized and rewarded according to skill and effort. The Marxist
premise of the question is that labour is a 'force' and that it is not
in a market or has skill capital involved. The worker sells his skills to the highest bidder. A business man that bids to low gets no skilled workers.
“Is our libertarian willing to acknowledge that workers who bargain
for their services, individually and collectively, are also employing
Yes and an employer that refuses to trade with such a group and
employs others is also bargaining and employing market forces. Also If
the Union covered, out of fees, unemployment insurance for
ex-employees it would be a fully valid market entity. Most would also
be bankrupts. Only government can make a closed shop.
our libertarian willing to admit that a “free market” needs
No! Define regulation? Why should we use regulations that are quickly
obsolete in a changing world and can only be changed years late when
parliaments get around to it. Insurance, private dispute resolution
agencies, quality assurance branding organizations can all do this
faster. Also in the free market no one is exempt from boycott or
lawsuit where-as someone that is met the regulations but still does
harm because they're obsolete or unworkable is cleared in court. Love
Canal was fully regulated yet people died.
“Does our libertarian believe in democracy? If yes, explain what’s
wrong with governments that regulate.”
The majority is not always right. So no an absolute democracy will
fail. The free market rewards effort and innovation, no one is
excluded from participating, house wives and minorities
are not excluded from it. Opportunity is equal for all. Thiel's
beneficiaries” are those that
are taught that effort and opportunity are racial impossibles. They
are minorities, socialists of all colour.
Those that are truly disabled, brain damaged or quadriplegics can be
supported in the market by non state charity entities and crowd
funded trusts but its early days there.
“Does our libertarian use wealth that wouldn’t exist without
government in order to preach against the role of government?”
Yes. While there are many things government has built because it has
banned any private agency from building or running the same things;
there are still things that government did not build but now owns
because it excluded competition and then took ownership. There are
other things used by libertarians that the government never built:
Linux, bitcoin, most optic fibres, some roads, most ports.
“Does our libertarian reject any and all government protection for
his intellectual property?”
There is a big split there but it depends on who's defining the
property. All are agreed that the current system is broken and needs
a free market overhaul. Even the anti-patent school believes in
industrial secrecy or trade secrets. Needs more work.
“Does our libertarian recognize that democracy is a form of
No if the consequences do not fall on the voter that voted for
something stupid. No if its not an open entry democratic system but
on controlled by two or three large parties. Yes if its fully free
entry and people suffer the consequences of stupid laws. The free
market is a democracy but not all democracies are free. Despotism of
a majority over a minority can not be freedom.
“Does our libertarian recognize that large corporations are a
threat to our freedoms?”
Define large corporations! If open entry in the marketplace exists
then no large corporation can be a threat to anyone's freedoms.
Remember Kodak and Lehman Brothers? If a corporation offers something
new, cheap and valuable it can get very large. However an obsolete
corporation can only stay large with government protection. Most of
the big banks are zombie banks, in the free market they would be gone
and few of us would notice their disappearance.
Rand was an adamant opponent of good works, writing that “The man
who attempts to live for others is a dependent. He is a parasite
in motive and makes parasites of those he serves.” That raises
another test for our libertarian: Does
he think that Rand was off the mark on this one, or does he agree
that historical figures like King and Gandhi were “parasites”?”
Rand was taught that Charity = communism in her Soviet Union
schooling. While she rejected socialism she never could shake that
assumption. Altruism is a simple purchase in the free market. It may
be entertainment, showing off, advertising, negotiation, or informal
insurance (there but for the grace of god go I) . You can't buy love
but you can buy respect. In some cases voluntary activity is a form
of training and adventure tourism. [And remember Gandhi's victory triggered a war that got millions killed.]
If you believe in the free market, why weren’t you willing to
accept as final the judgment against libertarianism rendered decades
ago in the free and unfettered marketplace of ideas?”
says I'm dead?
Some of us were active without funds for decades. And who says that
the American billionaires are the only players? The question ignores
the activity in Britain: Adam Smith clubs, Asia much of the rapid
development there is linked to people taught under the Austrian
school teachers of the 30's. Many books were published and sold well
in the 40's, 50's and 60's in many languages. The free market did not
reject us only the universities and they're all state subsidized
So in effect the “Eleven
questions that expose their contradictions and faulty logic” only
really expose R.J. Eskow's lack of logic and research. Most of what I
have said above has been published for decades though the corporation
and technology named change decade by decade.