Category Archives: Private Property

UPDATED: ‘Conservative’ Defects, Announces (D)evolution on Immigration (Tons Of Turncoats)

Conservatism, IMMIGRATION, Paleolibertarianism, Political Correctness, Political Philosophy, Private Property, Republicans, Rights, States' Rights, War on Drugs

A full-throated support for individual freedoms would mean a denunciation of the wicked War on Drugs and an abandonment of the useless and creepy fetish over another person’s prime real estate: a woman’s title in her body.

In a bid to remain in the anchor’s chair and to play a part in national politics, a conservative has chosen, instead, to say bye-bye to borders. Well, sort of.

Sean Hannity said this, on Thursday:

(Politico) Sean Hannity said Thursday he has “evolved” on immigration and now supports a “pathway to citizenship.”
Hannity told his radio listeners Thursday afternoon that the United States needs to “get rid of the immigration issue altogether.”
“It’s simple to me to fix it,” Hannity said.

This, as the country is still surveying the debris left by the “D-Bomb” dropped on Tuesday, Nov. 6. The reference to demographics is from this week’s column, “The D-bomb has Dropped,” now on RT. It speaks to the demographic shift in US population, which only a moratorium on mass immigration, buttressed by strong secessionist movements (as specified in “Into The Cannibal’s Pot”) can remedy.

“Left-libertarian and leftist protest over any impediment to the free flow of people across borders is predicated not on the negative, leave-me-alone rights of the individual, but on the positive, manufactured right of human kind to venture wherever, whenever.” (Mercer, May 1, 2009)

UPDATE: TONS OF TURNCOATS. Crybaby Boehner is leading a ton of other “conservatives” to the promised (la-la) land:

”A comprehensive approach is long overdue, and I’m confident that the president, myself, others can find the common ground to take care of this issue once and for all.”

“overhaul,” “reform,” “comprehensive solution” “fixing a broken system”: These are all euphemisms for amnesty, Dream Act, preferential treatment, subsidies continued, etc.

UPDATE II: The D-Bomb Has Dropped

Democrats, Elections, IMMIGRATION, Private Property, Republicans, The State, The West, Welfare

The current column, now on RT, is “The D-Bomb Has Dropped.” Here’s an excerpt:

“…People with higher incomes constitute a minority, an economically dominant minority (to paraphrase Amy Chua). People with low incomes are in the majority, a politically dominant majority.

The rich are politically impoverished; the poor politically rich. The rich dominate the economy, the poor dominate the polity.

When elections roll around, the politically powerful exact their revenge against the economically powerful.

What kind of a right gives one man control over another man’s life? In a democracy, the right to vote does just that.

As for demographics; they have become destiny. They were not necessarily so. Demographics have been the excuse central planners have advanced to persevere with immigration policies that destroy civil society and shore up the welfare state.

The now-waning West became great not because it outbred the rest of the world. The West was once great because of its human capital—innovation, exploration, science, philosophy; because of superior ideas, and the willingness to defend such a civilization, not because it was more populated than the rest of the world.

America doesn’t need more people; it needs better people.

Making nice with constituencies that vote repeatedly and habitually for the candidate who promises them more stuff is tantamount to sleeping with the enemy. The only voters who could be swayed by the promise of the free market are the Democratic Party’s Asian supporters, since they enjoy higher incomes and stabler families than the party’s Hispanic and black devotees.

Ultimately, elections are about perception—the way in which the people perceive the political planks of the two parties. …”

Read the rest of “The D-Bomb Has Dropped,” on RT.

If you’d like to feature this column, WND’s longest-standing, exclusive paleolibertarian column, in or on your publication (paper or pixels), contact ilana@ilanamercer.com.

JOIN THE DISCUSSION, AND DO BATTLE FOR LIBERTY BY:

• Using the content-sharing icons on Barely a Blog posts.

• At the WND and RT Comments Sections, and on Facebook.

• By clicking to “Like,” “Tweet” and “Share” WND’s “Return To Reason” , and RT’s “Paleolibertarian Column.”

UPDATED I: Facebook THREAD: In reality, voting Republican does not shrink the state. On the contrary; Republicans are a reliable engine of government growth. But with the importation of constituencies that want stuff, the two parties are competing to satisfy that demand. Importing third-world dependents has only helped grow the welfare state.

UPDATE II: I needed a laugh. A friend needed one. We all need one. Here is Patrick J. Buchanan in one of his finest moments.

‘Bronco Bamma’: A 4×4 Force For The State

Barack Obama, Classical Liberalism, Elections, Paleolibertarianism, Political Philosophy, Politics, Private Property, The State

On voting defensively:

I listened to a young (24), fiercely individualistic, libertarian friend speak about casting his vote for Mitt Romney. My pal may not be finely tuned to every philosophical nuisance, but he lives and breathes individualism. His backbreaking work as a proprietor of a small business means, moreover, that local politics are vital to his bottom-line. My friend explained to me why he would be voting to keep the toxic Dems out of office in our state, and why he supported Romney.

Although wedded to reality, columnist Jack Kerwick is “finely tuned to philosophical nuisance.” As mentioned in “On Living In Sin: The Sin of Abstraction,” Jack and I parted company over his decision to vote Romney. However, I admire Jack for “mixing it up”—for his commitment to arguing the issues and making pragmatic decisions in the rigorous and vigorous Rothbardian tradition.

But then Jack’s a scrappy New Jerseyan.

The entrepreneur (my young friend) and the philosopher (Jack Kerwick) are aligned in this instance.

I will say this unequivocally: “Bronco Bamma” (little girl tires of him and his rival, whose name at least she can pronounce)—Barry Soetoro Frankenstein, spawn of the state—is trash. Mitt Romney, however, is a patrician.

His individual achievements outside politics show that Mr. Romney is nothing like “Bronco Bamma,” who has always been at full throttle for the distributive state.

Circumscribing Gouging = Circumscribing Private Property

Business, Capitalism, Economy, Ethics, Individual Rights, Objectivism, Political Economy, Private Property, Reason

Rights-based arguments are seldom made by members of the media and their guests. In explaining what a (semantic) aberration the term gouging is John Stossel opted to privilege the utilitarian angle. So did his guests.

Like any voluntary exchange of goods, “gouging” amounts to free people exchanging property to which they hold title. Each relinquishes something he values less (money/goods/labor) for something he values more (money/goods/labor).

John Stossel and guests prefer to stick to purely utilitarian economics. That’s the mindset that prevails.

I’d like to hear our side argue for freedom by saying that, whether free markets work or not is secondary to the unalienable, immutable, rights of men. It so happens that—surprise!—upholding the absolute rights of the individual to life, liberty and property works very well. Wealth redounds to all.

Bless Stossel for his efforts to promote economic literacy, over decades. However, I listened to Steve Horowitz last night, and then “muted” when Stossel made the perennial decision that guides the dueling perspectives political panel.

Rather than let Steve enlighten, Stossel allowed the reality denier to hog the stage with a perversion, not a version, of the truth.

“By presenting the public with two competing perspectives—you mislead viewers into believing that indeed there are two realities, and that it is up to them to decide which one is more compelling.”

This positively postmodernist format would be fine were Rome not burning. However, “a Homeric contest is underway in the USA. Rome is burning. Now is not the time to fiddle or to unwittingly defraud the public.”

As I wrote in “More Chris Christie Cretinism*: Outlawing Price ‘Gouging,’” in addition to acting as “the street signs of the economy,” “prices are the prerogative of private property”:

In a free market, the institute of private property ensures that we have prices. “Prices are like a compass: pegged to supply and demand they ensure the correct allocation of resources. Without market prices, supply and demand cannot be brought into balance and, by extension, consumer needs cannot be satisfied. Conversely, in socialized systems there are no prices because there is no private property. Absent such knowledge, misuse, misallocation and mismanagement of capital are inevitable.”