?7es to keep us warm and let us live in comfort where it would otherwise
be impossible. The fire in a fireplace is surrounded by solid bricks and
steel. A chimney carries away the toxic fumes. The only fuel the fire
gets is what the people carefully and deliberately give it, one log at a
time.
Libertarians believe government should be surrounded by permanent and
solid constraints (such as the constitution) which severely limit its
power. Special institutions should minimize the inevitable bad effects.
Most of all it should only get the limited resources that the people
carefully and deliberately give it.
If a fire gets out of a fireplace the house catches fire. The fire takes
all your possessions as fuel and grows without limit.
You and your
loved ones are in ever increasing danger. Some rooms are not as bad as
others but the fire will surely spread and destroy the whole house.
Our government is like a fire in our house that used to be small and well
contained but has gotten out of control. All around we see our social
institutions politicized and our businesses regulated to death. We see
our possessions and our livelihoods taxed away to fuel a government that
grows without limit. We and our loved ones are in ever increasing danger
from foreign wars, drug wars, and police brutality. Some parts of
society are not as bad as others but it is clear that soon the government
will have its claws in everything.
Libertarians urgently call for the immediate and drastic reduction of
government. We realize that there needs to be some government, like a
fire in a fireplace, but our government is like a fire out of control
which will surely destroy us all if it keeps on growing.
.c.Libertarianism and Nonviolence
Libertarians believe initiation of violence is always wrong.Only the
initiation of force or fraud is crime to a libertarian. Fraud is often
described as an indirect form of violence, making initiation of violence
the only crime to many libertarians.
To oppose government is to oppose institutional violence.According to
Ludwig Von Mises, a primary libertarian writer, "The state is essentially
an apparatus of compulsion and coercion. The characteristic feature of
its activities is to compel people through the application or the threat
of force to behave otherwise than they would like to behave." When
government is perceived thus, opposition to violence implies
libertarianism.
Libertarian Party members sign a pledge of nonviolence."I hereby certify
that I do not believe in or advocate the initiation of force as a means
of achieving political or social goals."
Libertarians always oppose initiation of violence.Although bees can sting
they are considered friendly since they are harmless when left alone. So
too with libertarians. The only time violence is excused within
libertarianism is in defense against violence initiated by others.
According to Lanza del Vasto, a leader of the nonviolent movement in
France, the nonviolent are distinguished by these three beliefs:
Evil is not corrected or arrested by an equal evil.Libertarians value
restitution to the victim above punishment of the criminal.
The end does not justify the means.Libertarians believe good ends sought
by government or individuals do not justify violent means.
Fear, compulsion, and force can never establish justice.Libertarians
believe that government is based on fear, compulsion, and force so
increasing government can never establish justice.
1988 Libertarian Party presidential candidate Ron Paul said libertarians
seek a society where "there shall be no initiation of force by anyone,
particularly Government."
.c.The Most Dangerous Drug
Drugs, alcohol, gambling, sex, and other vices feel good but sometimes
have bad effects. Diatribes against these vices focus on the bad effects
but rarely mention the good feeling. Also unmentioned is the virtue of
temperance, as contrasted with abstinence. This is justified by the
assumption that people can't resist temptation once they've experienced a
thrill. Pretending that these vices are not pleasurable is puzzling
however since it clearly detracts from the credibility of the speaker.
A clear statement that things that feel good may have bad effects might
lead people to examine other sources of good feelings. I believe that
many symbolic political actions that feel good have extremely bad
effects. Politicians who inspire people with the thrill of battle
against evil would like that thrill to remain unquestioned as a guide to
action. Reminding people that thrills destroy judgment might lead them
to judge the thrill of politics more objectively.
Years ago I attended a political dinner in Davenport Iowa; it was my
first exposure to establishment politics on the grassroots level. As I
ate and talked to the people around me I sensed a feeling of great
conspiracy, like we were about to commit some incredible crime. Then
came the speech; "This is what we have to do to get power. Once we've
got power then we'll be able to make everybody do what we want and won't
that be great!". The whole message was tactics and techniques for
getting power so we could make everybody do what we wanted. I still
cringe when I think back on it.
The key feature, I realized later, was
the conspiratorial thrill. It's us vs them. It's exciting. It's
politics.
When our leaders urge us to all pull together they want the audience to
feel that thrill. Skilled speakers can work large audiences into a
frenzy of enthusiasm. Hitler and the Nazis were making history; they
were on the winning team (at least for a while); they were thrilled. The
lesson from Hitler, drugs, and alcohol is that the intensity of the
thrill is not connected to the goodness of the acts. The thrill is just
as real for genocide, generosity, or getting drunk. Just because a
speaker or writer thrills you doesn't mean their ideas will work.
It's especially easy to get enthusiastic about benevolent goals such as
feeding the hungry, saving the children, or making the streets safe,
without questioning what impact your actions have in the real world. How
could it do harm to feed the hungry, save the children, or make the
streets safe? The thrill of involvement and the elevation of self esteem
that come from "doing something" encourage symbolic gestures that often
make the problems worse.
Massive shipments of food (to feed the hungry) to the governments of
third world nations often reinforce the power of petty tyrants and
destroy local agriculture. Intrusive social workers (to save the
children) forcibly remove children from non conforming families and place
them in foster homes with lower quality of life. Gun control laws (to
make the streets safe) make peaceful honest people helpless in the face
of violence.
These examples are all symbolic political acts designed to give people
that thrill, the thrill the Nazis felt, the herd thrill. This is the most
dangerous drug. Wars and dictatorships depend on this thrill to cloud
the citizens' minds and to suspend their judgment.
There are harmless sources of the herd thrill; the most obvious is
sports. You can root for your favorite team to your heart's content with
social approval and no risk. You can close your mind completely to the
idea that the other team might have merit. However when the other team
is drug dealers, gun owners, bigots, capitalists, or communists that same
enthusiasm and lack of thought leads to disaster time after time.
Remember temperance? Temperance is not abstinence. It is the ability to
experience pleasure without being controlled by it. The things I enjoy;
food, sex, coffee, politics, etc. do not control me. If I cease to enjoy
these or believe they are starting to control me I am ready to give them
up.
So what's the point? Be temperate in your enjoyment of the herd thrill
for it is the most dangerous drug. Don't let it cloud your thinking or
close your mind. Don't let your emotions overwhelm your judgment or your
efforts to do good will likely wind up doing harm. If people thought
about politics as much as they cared about politics the world would be
libertarian today.
.c.Libertarian Duality Symbol
The libertarian duality symbol consists of a yin-yang symbol with the
movement counter clockwise and the dark half on the bottom. This places
the round parts side by side with the dark one on the right. The dark
round area on the right contains a light dollar sign. and the light
round area on the left contains a dark peace sign.
We can best communicate our ideas to the rest of the world by using a lot
of different methods. This symbolizes a positive attitude towards peace
and money instead of a negative attitude toward government.
I developed this symbol on the drive up to the 1991 Libertarian National
Convention in Chicago. I made up some buttons at the convention and was
able to get the opinions of some of the movers and shakers of the
libertarian movement who were there. I saw some puzzlement and confusion
but lots of nods, smiles, and laughter from hard core libertarians.
The peace sign is a symbol of the sixties. The symbol for opposition to
war and the "establishment". Libertarians oppose foreign wars and often
the hated "establishment" was actually the government. Nonviolence and
noninterference are characteristics of both hippies and libertarians.
Toleration of diversity and social experimentation are common to both.
Both hippies and libertarians call for the legalization of drugs. The
people that wore peace signs in the sixties are now everywhere in our
society and many still hold strong beliefs. We represent them better
than anyone else today. We represent peace, nonviolence, and toleration;
attractive values to a whole generation.
The dollar sign brings completely different images. Ayn Rand made it
symbolize the free market in millions of minds. It stands for having
money, making money, caring about money. Most people want more money.
We know how to make it happen. We represent them.
The yin-yang symbolizes a duality where two concepts or aspects each
support and enable the other to exist as in night & day, black & white,
male & female, etc. Libertarian duality has been expressed in many ways:
left & right, peace & prosperity, harmony & abundance, liberal &
conservative, free minds & free markets, toleration & responsibility,
personal freedom & economic freedom, freedom of expression & freedom of
enterprise, etc.
Both are necessary for either to exist. Harmony and scarcity are
exclusive, so are abundance and conflict. Where there is no peace, there
is no prosperity; where there is no prosperity, there is no peace. The
symbol joining the peace sign and the dollar sign shows this duality.
The Libertarian Party is symbolized by the Statue of Liberty. Other
libertarian organizations like the Advocates for Self Government and the
International Society for Individual Liberty also have good symbols. The
peace sign, the dollar sign, the yin-yang, all represent general ideas,
not specific groups. The libertarian duality symbol stands for an idea,
not a group.
It can be used anywhere: T-shirts, hats, buttons, belt buckles, jewelry,
graffiti, etc. If you feel that it expresses what you feel about
libertarianism, display one. It invites comment and question. Even
folks with a strong negative attitude toward one of the symbols are
likely to have a positive attitude toward the other.
.c.Roots of Socialism
Socialism continues to attract the foolish and the wise in spite of its
repeated failures. The breadth and depth of this attraction suggest that
it is rooted in some common experience. That experience is childhood.
Children have food, shelter, education, and medical care provided (well
or badly) by adults. Socialists want food, shelter, education, and
medical care provided for everyone.
Families are small socialist
societies. Socialists want to treat everyone like family.
Children want things before they learn about money. When parents say "we
can't afford it" children think they're cruel or stupid. Socialists
believe a government that doesn't give the people what they want is cruel
or inefficient.
Children believe what they're told. They believe Santa Claus is real and
leaders are wise. Socialists believe in the wisdom of their leaders.
Adults are skeptical of leaders, preferring their own wisdom and beliefs.
Children can't imagine human diversity. They assume everyone feels like
they do. Socialists think the right plan will make everyone happy. In
reality our different values, habits, and perceptions make profound
disagreement natural and inevitable.
Children need parents who care about them so elected officials claim to
care about the people. Businessmen who care mainly for themselves are
like bad parents neglecting their children. That's why socialists
respect elected officials and hate businessmen.
Children should not control adults and socialists should not control
society. Socialist thinking regresses us into a state of helpless
dependence. The illusion of socialism will only be discarded when people
understand its roots and outgrow its childish world view.
.c.Slavery Today
The abolitionists in the early 1800's wanted to abolish slavery and were
generally considered to be crazy dreamers. Slavery had always existed,
it was supported in the Bible. Sweet little old ladies relied on slave
income. The slaves were unable to control themselves and needed masters
to keep them busy and productive. But the abolitionists wouldn't listen
to common sense. They said slavery was morally wrong. They kept up the
shouting and, after years of little progress, people started to agree.
The serious economic problems of slavery may have caused much of the
change but the abolitionists were a visible group with which people could
identify. They were also a source of arguments against slavery for
anyone to hear, evaluate, and perhaps carry forward to others. In one
generation our society came to a consensus that it was wrong for one
human being to own another and slavery vanished from the USA. Or did it?
Total slavery was abolished but partial slavery has grown to more than
replace it. Slaves are people who work for no money and have no choice.
If you can't keep all the money you earn, you're doing some work for no
money. Taxation is slavery. Half the population was never wholly
enslaved but now the whole population is half enslaved. Total slaves
were owned by thousands of different masters, some cruel, some kind. Now
we all have the same slave master called government and who would call it
kind?
Today's abolitionists are called libertarians. They are generally
considered to be crazy dreamers. Taxes have always existed, they are
supported in the Bible. Sweet little old ladies rely on social security.
Foolish citizens must have some of their money spent more wisely by the
authorities. But the libertarians won't listen. They say taxes are
morally wrong. They keep shouting and, perhaps sometime soon, people
will start to agree. The serious economic problems of taxation may cause
much of the change but the libertarians are a visible group with which
people can identify. They are also a source of arguments for freedom for
anyone to hear, evaluate, and perhaps carry forward to others.
Modern slavery has caused hostility between the races to increase after
years of progress. A worker half of whose paycheck goes to taxes feels
used by unemployed welfare recipients. Feelings of injustice,
resentment, and anger are normal to slaves.
The money you see going as taxes is only part of the total. Every loaf
of bread you buy pays hundreds of taxes. The corporate tax on the
company that baked the bread, not to mention the corporate taxes on all
the companies that supplied materials or services. Fuel taxes on all the
transportation, income taxes on all the employees, sales taxes on much of
the materials. All businesses pass on taxes as a cost. All the taxes on
all the businesses that supplied the company that baked the bread were
passed on in the price of their goods or services. This adds to the
taxes of all kinds paid directly by the company, and the wholesaler, and
the grocery store. All taxes are paid by increased product cost. You
pay the cost, you pay the tax. You must, they must. All are enslaved.
The ending of slavery by the abolitionists was from the outside.
Most
abolitionists were not themselves slaves or masters. The ending of
taxation and regulation must happen from the inside. There's nobody out
there to rescue us. We can appeal to our master the government to set us
free but history doesn't offer much hope of success. We partial slaves
are the overwhelming majority however and this alone may permit our
liberation by nonviolent means. Those who enjoy the security of slavery
will find that the world is full of people who will give love, money, and
even respect to anyone who will do exactly as they are told. These will
generally be kinder masters because, unlike the government, they must
entice people to become their slaves by offering rewards and allow people
to quit if the rewards are insufficient.
Those who work for no money voluntarily are called volunteers. Some of
our largest and most treasured institutions use volunteer labor to
perform important services for society. Those who wish to do good works
and can abstain from material rewards form the bulk of the volunteers.
Libertarians have no quarrel with those who point to the good works
supported by taxes. Let those who value those works be the ones who pay
for them or do them without pay. Let those who disagree further their
own dreams with their own lives.
.c.Deregulation Examples
Libertarians are often challenged to defend deregulation.
positive examples of deregulation in action.
Here are some
Religion:Because of the constitutional separation of church and state the
religious institutions in the United States are almost completely
deregulated. The result of this is diversity, prosperity and abundance
of religion. Any religion imaginable is available to the consumer.
Buddhists, Unitarians, Scientologists and hundreds of sects of
Christians all go to the churches of their choice. The only limitations
are lack of interest or the violation of some non-religious law. Not
only are the consumers getting what they want but the institutions are
thriving. The amount of money received and resources owned by churches
is astounding. Although they have profound and unavoidable disagreements
the different churches compete to attract customers instead of going to
war as they do in many other countries. The institutions are prosperous
and the customers are happy, all thanks to the absence of government
interference.
Software:A more modern example of the benefits of deregulation is
computer software. This industry has escaped regulation by evolving
quickly and changing rapidly. Anyone can write computer programs and
sell them without a license and without government certification of the
programs. The only limitations are selling deliberately destructive
programs, selling programs that interfere with national security, and
paying income taxes on the profits. The result has again been incredible
diversity, prosperity, and abundance. A list of programs available today
would fill a large book and it's growing all the time. The price to the
consumer is constantly and rapidly falling. Programs costing thousands
of dollars a few years ago cost tens of dollars today; programs that used
to cost hundreds of dollars are now free. Yet the institutions are
prospering. Billions of dollars are spent on programs and they are one
of the United State's most profitable exports. All this success is due
to the lack of regulation by the government. Imagine how different it
would be if computer programmers had to have credentials before they were
allowed to program and if programs had to be inspected and approved by
government bureaucrats.
Lima, Peru:Anyone who has doubts about anarchy should read a best selling
South American book called "The Other Path" by Hernando De Soto. It is
the report of a commission set up to study the underground economy in and
around Lima, Peru. Poor people coming to Lima find the regulatory
barriers completely insurmountable so they take the law into their own
hands. What do these anarchists do? Mostly they do construction,
manufacturing, transportation, and marketing. Most of the homes around
Lima (and most other third world cities) were built in defiance of the
law. Most of the bus systems evolved from gypsy cabs. Most retail
stores evolved from illegal street vendors. Most factories evolved from
underground home shops. The level of violence in these communities is
extremely low and so is the presence of government. The people have to
be well organized in order to get things done without a government and
they spend a lot of time at different organizational meetings. This is
hardly the popular image of anarchy yet millions -- probably billions --
of people live it every day.
.c.Libertarians and Vegetarians
It is sometimes hard for non-libertarians to understand why libertarians
feel the way they do. Perhaps this parallel between libertarians and
vegetarians will help. There are many different reasons for being a
vegetarian. Some are vegetarians because they believe it is healthy, or
inexpensive, or that it conserves natural resources.
Consider those who are vegetarians because they don't want to be guilty
of killing animals. They don't have to watch the animals struggle, hear
their screams, or see their blood flow to know that to put meat on their
plate an animal had to die. It doesn't help to tell them the deaths are
painless or that the animals were bred and raised only for meat. To them
it is still killing and they want no part of it. They are fortunate to
live in an age when they can avoid it and maintain a normal life style.
A hundred years ago those who refused to wear leather shoes probably went
barefoot. They realize that they are a small minority and most people
don't share their feeling. Some practice their vegetarianism quietly
while some argue and march to convince people that it's just plain wrong
to kill animals.
There are many different reasons for being a libertarian. Some are
libertarians because they dislike being told what to do, or think that
politicians are crooks, or appreciate the wonders of a free market.
Consider those who are libertarians because they don't want to be guilty
of threatening violence to humans. They don't have to see the people
rotting in jail for victimless crimes, or feel the hard choices between
health, safety, and paying taxes. They know that behind every regulation
or tax there is the threat of violence or even death for disobedience.
It doesn't help to tell them that most taxes are painless or that the
majority voted to give their power to the government. To them it is
still threatening violence and they want no part of it. They are
unfortunate to live in an age when they cannot avoid it an maintain a
normal life style. Those who refuse to travel on government built roads
are immobilized. They realize that they are a small minority and most
people don't share their feeling. Some quietly practice their
libertarianism while some argue and march to convince people that it's
just plain wrong to threaten violence to humans.
.c.Welfare Source
The separation of taxes and welfare makes it easy for people to accept
money from the government without experiencing any moral conflict. This
parable exposes that conflict.
Imagine that you are a single parent with health problems and few job
skills trying to go to school, raise children, and earn a living at the
same time. You are just the sort of person who deserves welfare.
Imagine that I am a wealthy benefactor who has sympathy for your
situation. I drop in every week with a $200 check to help you to survive
and work toward your goals. I ask nothing in return and we become
friends. Every week I stay and we talk for a while. This goes on for
months. You are genuinely thankful for my assistance and I am genuinely
happy to see your progress. All is well.
One afternoon while we are talking you ask me what I do for a living.
I explain that I am a mugger. I choose my victims at random, grab them
from behind, hold a knife to their throats, and demand their money. I
take about half their money, keep most of it for myself, and give the
rest to needy people. I rarely kill anyone because most people don't
resist.
Does this new information change the way you feel about the $200?
The same government that gives welfare takes, with threats of violence,
half the money we earn. They keep most of it for themselves and give
some to needy people. They rarely kill anyone because most people don't
resist.
.c.Libertarian or Anarchist?
Libertarians are often accused of being anarchists or asked what the
difference is between a libertarian and an anarchist. The popular image
of anarchy is unrestrained violence and looting. Libertarians take a
stronger stand against violence and looting than any other political
group including republicans and democrats. The early history of the
United States with its severely limited government was strongly
libertarian and completely different from this image of anarchy.
The misunderstanding on this issue comes from the ideal state of peace
and productivity with no government interference imagined by many
libertarians who forget that we are the only ones who can imagine it. In
a libertarian society the evolution of voluntary institutions providing
the few remaining government services might lead to the gradual
elimination of government but this scenario is completely beyond the
imagination of the general public and it harms our cause to confront them
with such a startling vision.
Here is a menu of answers to the question:
What's the difference between libertarians and anarchists?
The traditional answer:Libertarians want severely limited government and
anarchists want none.
The humanist answer:Libertarians are nonviolent; some anarchists are
violent.
The funny answer:Libertarians are to anarchists as nudists are to naked
people.They're just middle class & organized so they appear less crazy.
The Party answer (from Andre Marrou):An anarchist is an extreme
libertarian, like a socialist is an extreme democrat, and a fascist is an
extreme republican.
The graphic answer:It's like the difference between a lover and a
rapist.They're both in the same place but one uses violence to get there.
.c.Sound Bites
Most of these sound bites are original but I probably heard some from
other libertarians and forgot their source.
Peaceful honest people don't belong in jail.
Are you skeptical of libertarianism?
libertarians.
Good!
Skeptics make the best
If you want the Democrats or Republicans to run your life, vote for them.
If you want to run your own life, vote Libertarian.
Compared to the war on drugs the Viet Nam war was a victory.Viet Nam
isn't killing civilians in the United States.
If coffee were illegal we'd be struggling to save our school children
from the menace of crack caffeine.
If the government were as involved in clothing as it is in health care
sewing at home would be a crime and we would be wondering how to provide
$1,000 suits for all the millions of naked people.
Just because a product, like roads, benefits us all doesn't mean the
government should provide it. We all benefit when people wake up on
time. Should the government provide free alarm clocks?
To live under socialism, join the military.
Taxation is slavery.
The more complex the rules, the more ways to cheat.
Socialist: From each according to his ability, to each according to his
need.Libertarian: From each according to his choice, to each according to
your choice.
The only governments in nature are pecking orders and dominance
struggles; human governments are included.
Predicting the market is hard but predicting the regulations is harder.
Someday I would like to open my morning paper and see nothing about any
government on the first few pages.
A dull knife is better than a sharp knife if it's held against your
throat. Civilization would be destroyed if all government regulations
were enforced.
Some diseases are worse than others but few people approve of any
disease. Some taxes are worse than others but few libertarians approve
of any tax.
People easily doubt or forget new facts but they generally remember a new
way of connecting the facts they already know.
Giving a politician access to your wallet is like giving a dog access to
your refrigerator.
We have too much government because we have too much faith in government.
The defining question of any political system is "Who goes to jail?".
A sincere person with illusions is more dangerous than any liar.
All wars and most famines are caused by excessive faith in government.
Bad ideas about government do more harm than bad people in government.
We hold our elected officials to unreasonable standards of perfection
because we give them unreasonable power over our lives.
The most dangerous psychopaths are the ones in government.Serial killers
may have dozens of victims. Hitler had millions.
There are many quiet libertarians but few ex-libertarians.
You don't need to be 100% libertarian to help the cause.
Chicken
wouldn't be a popular food if you had to eat the whole thing.
Ignoring the difference between violent and nonviolent crime is like
ignoring the difference between biting and nonbiting dogs.
Before asking how people should be governed, ask whether they should be
governed.
The government won't use widespread violence to maintain control. . .
unless the people resist.
The video camera is the machine gun of the information age.
Teaching public school children how to think would be like teaching
prisoners how to dig tunnels.
The market manipulates you with money.The government manipulates you with
jail.
If trade barriers are good then why not have them between all the states
or even all the counties?
Free trade isn't described in thousand page documents.Free trade is what
happens between Florida and Georgia.
If people thought about politics as much as they cared about politics the
world would be libertarian today.
The following "libertarian definition of politics" is not original but
it's a great way to start a speech or conversation.
To understand what "politics" really means just break the word into its
parts. Everybody knows poly means many; and ticks are bloodsucking
parasites.
.c.Excessive Government
This is a letter to the editor in response to an editorial decrying the
absence of meaningful choice in our elections.
This is in response to the superb column in last Monday's Clearwater Sun
entitled "Neither GOP nor Democrats have been able to curb spending."
The sorry spectacle of bureaucrats wallowing at the trough of taxpayer's
money is sadly accurate. The United States was founded on a constitution
whose main purpose was to limit the power and size of the government. It
worked well enough to give us the most spectacular demonstration of
freedom, prosperity, and productivity that the world has ever seen. But
we are witnessing the end of the good times, a decline of freedom,
prosperity, and productivity in the United States. We see a government
out of control under both Democratic and Republican administrations.
What can be done?
The article concludes on a weak note of hope, "Maybe
we do need a new party."
Maybe we already have one. The Libertarian party has run presidential
candidates since 1972 and got one percent of the vote in 1980. They are
the third largest and fastest growing party. From the very beginning
they have been saying that we don't need a gigantic and powerful
government telling us what to do and taking ever increasing amounts of
our money. Their platform calls for drastic reduction in the size and
power of government on all levels, an end to inflationary monetary
policies, and a balanced budget.
The founding fathers fought a bloody revolution to break free of English
rule yet those regulations and taxes were far less oppressive than ours
today. Instead of violent revolution we can change our government by
voting. A vote for the Libertarian party is the most meaningful vote you
can cast because it sends an unmistakable message to Washington
bureaucrats that if they don't change their ways we the people will boot
them out.
There is a third party. They believe that the government is far too
powerful. They believe that peaceful honest people don't belong in jail.
They believe that you know best how to run your own life and spend your
own money. They believe in peace, freedom, and prosperity through less
government.
.c.The Water Crisis
This is a letter to the editor sent during Tampa Bay's annual water
crisis.
Perhaps I'm missing some subtle point but it seems to me there is a
simple and fair solution to our water crisis. First, raise the price of
water. Second, eliminate the legal barriers to conserving it.
If water becomes more expensive people will search for ways to use less
as shown in the past with gasoline and energy. The people least hurt
will be those who already use the least and those who use the most will
feel the biggest pinch, certainly that's fair. The police can devote
their time to preventing and punishing violent crime instead of arresting
folks for watering their lawns, certainly that makes sense. Our chronic
water shortage will continue unless we spend more money to develop
supplies and what better source than income from the sale of water. If
the price of water reflects the cost of providing it the whole situation
will become self sustaining. Maybe someday we could even get the
government completely out of the water supply business. If the same
bureaucrats were responsible for providing us with toilet paper I'm sure
we'd have frequent shortages of that too.
But even if the price goes up (which it will eventually anyway) our own
laws prevent us from conserving water. Cisterns to collect rainwater,
composting toilets, and gray water systems are generally outlawed by
zoning and building codes. These systems are highly developed and can
save a great deal of water yet the same people that beg us to conserve
water will put us in jail if we use them. The present low price of water
also helps make many of these systems uneconomical.
I'm probably whistling in the dark with these ideas. It's far more fun
to call the police on your neighbors than to pay a little higher utility
bill. It's good politics too, the office holders get to play hero for
their stop gap solutions and get no blame for the long term problem. But
water shortages will be with us forever unless we pay what it costs to
provide and let each other conserve it however we like.
.c.Price Gouging
After any widespread natural disaster reporters and commentators often
lament the despicable practice of price gouging. Merchants are cursed as
heartless and cruel. Victimized shoppers vent their anger and
frustration. Local police are called on to intervene.
This is exiting melodrama but sometimes wisdom and mercy dictate
different courses of action. The immediate and obvious suffering of the
shoppers is not the only consideration. Localized, temporary, radical
price increases (price gouging) may actually have some beneficial effects
visible only from a more distant perspective.
It is important that critical resources in a post disaster situation be
conserved, substituted, and extended as much as possible. Whenever
something has a very high price tag, like expensive but life saving
medicine, most consumers will try to conserve, substitute, and extend it
as much as they can. Very high prices tend to make consumers buy no more
than they really need and make that stretch as much as they can.
In a post disaster situation critical resources tend to sell out rapidly
and become completely unavailable in the disaster area. Very high prices
tend to slow this process and cause the goods to remain in the stores for
a somewhat longer period of time, maintaining their availability for
victims who cannot reach the stores quickly.
It is important that fresh supplies enter the disaster area as soon as
possible even when transportation is difficult. Temporarily high prices
insure that both nearby and far away merchants will immediately try to
get the needed supplies into the disaster area since the high prices can
more than pay for the added transportation expense.
Allocating scarce law enforcement resources to controlling prices takes
them away from higher priority activities like fire & rescue, looting
prevention, and traffic control. Lives may be lost while emergency
personnel argue with merchants about their prices. Price controls also
often create black markets, adding a criminal dynamic to an already bad
situation.
Locally high prices may increase outside sympathy for the disaster
victims. Anger at the price gougers may inspire additional donations of
supplies to deprive them of their outrageous profits.
Local merchants have an opportunity (if they can afford it) to purchase
community good will by keeping their prices the same or lowering them in
spite of increased demand. The merchants may also be victims however and
those extra profits might be the only thing that makes it possible for
them to rebuild their businesses.
So although it is easy to condemn price gouging as cruel and greedy, it
may not be in the best interests of the disaster victims to try to
suppress it. Why does the media show only the angry shoppers and not the
good effects of price increases? Disasters are human drama and the
suffering of the victims is dramatic. The beneficial effects are much
harder to observe and describe than the anger and frustration of the
disaster victims.
.c.Arming Women
This letter was published shortly after a serial killer was captured.
All too often murders are blamed on the availability of hand guns. Now
we have seen a horrible example of what can happen without guns. I'm
talking about the women who were recently killed in and around Tampa by a
predatory male. What can we learn from this multiple tragedy? First,
killers don't need guns. Total elimination of all firearms would not
have deterred this one. Second, the way we deal with this type of
criminal is not effective. Not only is it costly in personnel,
equipment, and money but additional lives are lost while law enforcement
agencies identify and locate the killer. Third, some groups of women are
so powerless that they can be systematically murdered with little risk to
the murderer.
I suggest that women who have to work where there is danger of rape,
kidnapping, or murder consider carrying a concealed weapon. Media
attention to the possibility that women may be armed can dramatically
reduce the incidence of rape. In Orlando, six thousand women took a
highly publicized firearms training course and rape declined 90%. Other
cities have seen substantial decreases in crime attributable to civilian
firearms training. This would work in Tampa Bay.
This is not macho, this is not flag waving or constitution quoting, this
is an appeal to women to save their own lives. Don't let terrifying
fantasies blind you to terrifying realities. It doesn't help society for
peaceful honest people, women or men, to be powerless victims of the
violent.
.c.To Feminist Writer Sonia Johnson
"Going Out of Our Minds" is a superb piece of liberation literature.
It told me a lot about the differences and similarities between feminism
and libertarianism. Again and again I saw passages where the
substitution of the word "government" for "patriarchy" would change your
words into pure libertarianism. Your idea regarding abortion, that women
simply learn to do it so laws become unenforceable and meaningless, is a
perfect example of a libertarian solution.
I was reminded of an old joke where an atheist was chased up a tree by a
bear. As the situation looked more and more hopeless the unbeliever
finally broke down and prayed "Lord, if you won't help me, just please
don't help that bear!". I feel this way toward the feminist movement.
If you won't help the libertarians, just please don't help the
government!
Why are we invisible to you? Even in your chapter on running for
president you never mention us, the party of liberation. A libertarian
woman ran for vice president in 1972 (the first Libertarian Party
campaign). A libertarian woman will probably run for president by the
end of the century. The campaign manager for Russell Means is a women.
The best state chair Florida has had in recent years was a woman. The
best local chair Tampa Bay ever had was a woman. Emma Goldman and Ayn
Rand epitomize the dual anarchist-capitalist roots of libertarianism.
Even the statue of liberty is female! This isn't tokenism, intelligent
women are realizing that government is the worst oppressor and
libertarians are the only ones fighting it.
Do you reject our tolerance of evil? I constantly see people around me
doing things I know are horribly destructive and cruel. Most folks,
naturally enough, want laws to stop people from doing things they
consider wrong. But control extended beyond knowledge can only do harm.
The question is, what do we really know is wrong, always wrong, so wrong
we are better off when violence is used to suppress it? The party
platform says only force and fraud qualify. Can men oppress women
without using force or fraud? Certainly not very effectively, perhaps not
at all.
Do you reject our embrace of property rights? Territoriality throughout
the animal kingdom is more pronounced in males so I am not surprised at
women's disinterest in property rights. But power will always go to the
power seekers and they can do much greater harm with laws than with
riches. Laws are harder to resist, harder to escape, harder to control,
and inherently violent. Let us remove the weapon of government from the
reach of the fighters. There's plenty of politics in business for those
who seek command.
Do you really think the democrats or republicans have anyone's liberation
on their agenda? The Libertarian Party has everyone's liberation as our
only goal.
.c.To Humanists
As a humanist and a libertarian I seek "a world in which peace,
prosperity, freedom, and happiness are widely shared" (Humanist Manifesto
II). I believe this goal can best be reached by reducing the power of
government. There is nothing inherently humanistic about the use of
government to improve society.
A serious practical problem is raised by the pervasive inefficiency of
government. Wherever both private and government agencies have the same
goal we see government agencies operating at lower quality and higher
cost. Voluntary institutions usually spend less than a quarter of their
funds on administration whereas government agencies often spend more than
half. A serious ethical problem is raised by the real or threatened
violence behind every government action. When is violence humanistic?
Although I share humanist goals the use of violent means to advance them
repels me.
Throughout history humankind has been haunted by the twin specters of
church and state. The humanists enthusiastically disbelieve in the
church but seem to believe all the more in the power and goodness of the
state. Freeing human minds of religious shackles is admirable but what
of human bodies shackled by well meaning rulers?
Let us not shackle
others to our dreams. The drug of political power is ever tempting to
all who wish to benefit humanity but it is addictive and destructive even
to the wise. Time and again powerful rulers seeking a better world cause
widespread disaster. Is this the path of humanism?
A thousand years ago only radicals said people could live full and
rewarding lives without religion, yet today such lives are common. A
hundred and fifty years ago only radicals said slavery was immoral and
should be abolished, yet it came to pass. Today only libertarian
radicals decry the violence and injustice inherent in government. Both
libertarians and humanists seek a world of harmony and abundance. Both
are radical movements in a large and diverse society.
Both have a
heritage of unyielding respect for human rights.
Both claim such
notables as Thomas Jefferson and Thomas Paine.
Both revere the Magna
Carta and the Declaration of Independence. This is a call for dialogue
between us.
.c.To New Age Healers
The decisions we make about our health and our bodies are some of the
most important personal choices we face. Today we see the government
making these choices for us more and more with terrible results.
Some of you have been hampered in your craft by legal structures claiming
to protect health while actually destroying it. Some of you have friends
or relatives sick or dead because the FDA won't let them get the cure
they need. The catastrophic rise in medical costs in recent years would
be much less severe but for the availability of medicare money. Now even
medicare fails to buy needed treatments and those without it are doubly
hurt.
You may perhaps already have negative feeling towards the AMA and the
habit it has of suppressing alternative medical practices. But the AMA
is only a professional organization, and there is a real role and a real
need for these in most professions, including medicine. The thing that
makes the AMA such a problem is that it has the power of the law and the
police behind it. Without the power of police it could only protest and
withhold approval of alternate medical arts. Whoever believed in
conventional medicine could patronize only AMA approved medical
facilities so no one would actually lose any protection. Everyone else
would be free to practice any sort of healing arts they wished.
How about the FDA? Same approach applies. Durk Pearson and Sandy Shaw
in their life extension book have a big chapter near the back about the
government's role. They want FDA approval to be a matter of labeling.
Anybody who wants to be protected from unapproved drugs could just look
for the FDA label. Other drugs could sit along side them on the same
shelves for people who lack faith in the judgment of the agency. They
point out that the FDA policy of requiring extensive safety and
effectiveness tests costs a considerable number of lives. Think about
it. If the FDA approves a drug and ten people die from taking it then
the FDA has a big problem. If the FDA holds a drug off the market and a
thousand people die who might have been saved, nobody blames the FDA.
People are now leaving the USA to go to Europe for cures they can't get
here. The one's who can't afford to go just get to stay sick or die.
These are examples close to home but the principles apply everywhere.
It's natural to want to help the poor, the sick, the ignorant. The
expression of this desire through government institutions creates a lot
of serious problems though. The programs to help the poor have created a
whole generation of experts at standing in line and filling out forms.
Medicare, meant to help the sick, has driven up the price of medical care
and turned medicine into a political problem. Since state educational
institutions must provide the same education to all, inevitably some
parents find themselves forced to pay to have their children taught
things counter to their deepest beliefs.
We see the flourishing of new spiritual movements and beliefs freely
competing with the traditional religions. Everybody has an opportunity
to choose their own spiritual path. The separation of church and state
is one of the main reasons we have such diversity and choice. Why can't
we extend this separation to other fields, medicine for instance.
Think about taxes for a moment. Why do people pay taxes? Why do you pay
taxes? Usually the reason is fear. Fear of losing your business, your
freedom, your wealth. Think about it; can good effects be produced with
money obtained by fear?
The libertarian philosophy has been a part of the United States since its
birth. Thomas Jefferson and Henry David Thoreau would be called
libertarians today. The Libertarian Party, active since 1972, is
organized on national and grassroots levels.
.c.Easy Things to do for Libertarianism
Call 1-800-682-1776 and request a free information packet.
Attend your local meetings.
Register Libertarian.
This is free at many banks and libraries.
Learn about libertarianism by conversation and reading.
Get on the local mailing list.
Call a talk show or write to a newspaper about libertarianism.
Copy and distribute this list and other libertarian literature.
Contribute money to help cover expenses.
Put a libertarian bumper sticker on your car.
Talk about libertarianism.
Wear a button.
Tell your local group about opportunities for a libertarian guest
speaker.
Minimize dealings with government in your daily life. Get someone else to
do something from this list.
Add something to this list.
.c.Police Dilemma
People have mixed feelings about the police because the police have two
mixed roles; peace keeper and regulation enforcer.
The peace keeper is respected and admired. Peace keepers are heroes and
friends. Children want to grow up to be peace keepers. People like to
help the peace keepers do their job.
Peace keepers don't have to be busy, their visible presence discourages
violence, that's why they wear uniforms. Since they can be friends to
all but the violent they form strong bonds with the people in their
communities. People call on peace keepers when they need them by dialing
911 or shouting "help! police!". People generally join the police
because they want to be peace keepers.
Regulation enforcers are generally despised and avoided. Few are proud
have regulation enforcers for friends. Children rarely want to grow up
to be regulation enforcers. Regulation enforcers have to stay busy to do
their job and to reduce their visibility they often avoid wearing
uniforms. Since there are far more regulations than people are willing
to obey there is always more work to do. Instead of waiting for some
problem to occur they use expensive equipment and careful planning to
seek out violators. When violators hide they request bigger budgets to
ferret them out. To keep their identities secret regulation enforcers
rarely form strong bonds in their communities. Few people join the
police in order to become regulation enforcers.
In recent times there has been a change in the role of the police from
peace keeper to regulation enforcer. This change is due to excessive
regulation. The libertarians favor massive deregulation so the police
can go back to being the peace keepers we respect and admire instead of
the regulation enforcers we despise and avoid.
.c.Libertarian Pledge
HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I DO NOT BELIEVE IN OR ADVOCATE THE INITIATION OF
FORCE AS A MEANS OF ACHIEVING POLITICAL OR SOCIAL GOALS
Would you sign this? it's the Libertarian Party pledge on every
membership card.
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I... The pledge is a statement of fact in the
present tense about the signer.
...DO NOT BELIEVE IN OR ADVOCATE... The pledge says nothing about your
beliefs except that a particular one is absent. It says nothing about
your behavior except that you refrain from a particular advocacy.
...THE INITIATION OF FORCE... This can be paraphrased as a no first
strike policy. When children fight they often accuse each other of
hitting first. By renouncing initiation of force, the libertarian
becomes uniquely nonthreatening. The pledge permits the Libertarian
Party to function freely in an age when other subversive and radical
groups are being persecuted. All force is not initiation, libertarians
don't renounce retaliation and many own weapons. Governments get money
by initiating force so libertarians don't believe in taxes. Governments
regulate by initiating force so libertarians don't believe in regulation.
...AS A MEANS OF ACHIEVING POLITICAL OR SOCIAL GOALS.
is to it.
That's all there
The pledge doesn't ask why you don't believe in initiation of force.
Perhaps you see the initiation of force an inefficient way to solve
problems. Perhaps you see the initiation of force an immoral way to
solve problems. Perhaps you see the initiation of force as damaging your
karma. Perhaps you don't believe in or advocate anything political or
have any social goals. You just want the government to leave you alone!
Sign the pledge! You've just discovered you're a libertarian.
.c.Keep the Pledge
(In 1992 there was a debate in the Libertarian Party about dropping the
membership pledge. This was my input.).
I am strongly opposed to dropping the pledge as a membership requirement
for the Libertarian Party. Here are my reasons.
Other dissident political organizations in this country have been
destroyed by a simple tactic. The acts of violent and inflammatory
members working for the government characterize the groups as So too
individual businesses live and die in fierce competition yet their
efforts create balance and growth. This is the invisible hand.
Each time you give of yourself, your time, your money, you are part of
the invisible hand. The invisible hand of nature guides evolution of
nature. The invisible hand of Adam Smith guides the evolution of
commerce. In nature and in commerce competition leads to constant
evolution, adaptation, and improvement far beyond any intent of the
participants.
The farmer, against nature, fertilizes some plants and poisons others
distorting nature and creating imbalance. At least this imbalance keeps
us fed. The government, against commerce, funds some enterprises and
fines others distorting business and creating imbalance. This imbalance
only hurts us for it is ourselves and our potential that is being
distorted.
The invisible hand is unquestionably on the side of the libertarians. If
libertarianism is going to move into the aquarian age it will need some
vivid images with which to communicate. The invisible hand is one such
image. The invisible hand is really nothing more or less than the real
behavior of ordinary people, you and I. We are all part of the invisible
hand. The invisible hand acts through all of us. The invisible hand is
the force of evolution.
.c.Natural Libertarianism
Being natural is very much in vogue these days, especially in consumer
products. Perhaps we can show libertarianism to be natural also and take
advantage of this trend.
Begin by watching how animals relate to each other. There are pecking
orders, just like humans in corporations or the military. There are
flocks of birds and schools of fish, just like humans at sporting events.
There are mothers looking after young, just like humans. There is also a
lot of territorial behavior, just like humans with their possessions.
Few behaviors are as widespread as territoriality. The tiny tropical
fish, with a brain the size of a grain of sand, fiercely chases away
other tropical fish of the same species. If property is some kind of
abstract concept, how does it occur in creatures too simple to form
abstractions? Does your dog have a favorite toy? Have you tried taking
it away from him? Could you satisfy the dog with a substitute? Probably
not, which indicates that the dog knows and cares which toy is his.
Property isn÷t just a convention made up by humans, it is one of
the most widespread patterns in animal behavior. It is natural to humans
just as it is natural to other higher animals.
There is another way in which libertarianism is most in tune with
nature÷s way. Consider an ecosystem, like a woods or a lake.
Bunches of different animals and plants all living together. Harmony?
Depends on who you ask. The rabbit probably doesn÷t feel much
harmony with the fox and only from our remote perspective can we see how
they balance each other. But in spite of the constant eat or be eaten,
the whole system works. The ecosystem as a whole remains healthy and
adaptable if there is enough species diversity.
Bugs, weather, and disease come to natural systems, but when there are
lots of different species, most of them will survive any particular
threat and quickly move to fill the void left by those who don÷t
survive.
Farming is a constant battle against nature because it greatly reduces
species diversity. The farmer would like to have only wheat in a field
but without his attention it would quickly evolve into an ecosystem with
hundreds of species of plants and animals. The government is like some
humans farming others. They have a plan for the types of activities and
people they want to have but without their constant attention society
evolves into hundreds of different activities and types. When they try
to control humans they are, like the farmer, in a battle against nature.
One of the main principles that makes nature so rich is diversity. An
economy with a great diversity of different types will quickly adapt to
changing conditions. A diverse culture will be less susceptible to
damage from any source. How is this wonderful diversity to be created?
Diversity can÷t be created, it can only be allowed.
.c.Libertarianism and Humanism
This is a libertarian commentary on the Affirmations of Humanism
published in Free Inquiry, a humanist magazine.
Humanist:We are committed to the application of reason and science to the
understanding of the universe and to the solving of human problems.
Libertarian:The application of reason and science to politics is like the
application of boiling water to snow. The common belief that powerful
governments benefit mankind is manifestly unreasonable and unscientific.
Many have come to libertarianism when reason led them away from the
emotional appeals of politicians.
Humanist:We deplore efforts to denigrate human intelligence, to seek to
explain the world in supernatural terms, and to look outside nature for
salvation.
Libertarian:We deplore the efforts by our leaders to denigrate human
intelligence when they explain the world in political terms and ask us to
look to government instead of ourselves for salvation. The abstract
concept of government is completely supernatural and does not explain the
world at all.
Humanist:We believe that scientific discovery and technology can
contribute to the betterment of human life.
Libertarian:The libertarian movement has been criticized for having too
many technologists and calling for the deregulation of controversial
technologies. Scientific discovery and technology progress most rapidly
when the hope of profits justifies the investment of time and money in
research.
Humanist:We believe in an open and pluralistic society and that democracy
is the best guarantee of protecting human rights from authoritarian
elites and repressive majorities.
Libertarian:No society is more open than one with a libertarian
administration since the only legal prohibitions are against force and
fraud. Throughout history authoritarian elites and repressive majorities
have murdered and tortured millions of people. Ending this oppression is
our main goal.
Humanist:We are committed to the principle of the separation of church
and state.
Libertarian:The incredible diversity and prosperity of the churches in
the United States and the lack of bloodshed over religious issues is due
to this separation. We would like to see other institutions such as
agriculture, industry, business, transportation, housing, education, etc.
achieve this same diversity, prosperity, and harmony by being separated
from the state.
Humanist:We cultivate the arts of negotiation and compromise as a means
of resolving differences and achieving mutual understanding.
Libertarian:The arts of negotiation and compromise are essential to
commercial success. Merchants and customers commonly resolve differences
and achieve mutual understanding to their mutual benefit. The opposite
of negotiation and compromise is authority and force, typically exercised
by government. You cannot negotiate or compromise with government
regulations.
Humanist:We are concerned with securing justice and fairness in society
and with eliminating discrimination and violence.
Libertarian:We are concerned with increasing justice and fairness by
reducing force and fraud in society. We do not believe violent means
should be used to impose one group's concept of justice and fairness on
another or that the use of violence is justified to prevent or enforce
discrimination.
Humanist:We believe in supporting the disadvantaged and the handicapped
so that they will be able to help themselves.
Libertarian:Supporting the disadvantaged and handicapped is laudable as
long as it is accomplished without violence. When the government
dictates our behavior toward the handicapped and other minorities the
resentment people naturally feel against arbitrary authority is
misdirected at the minorities.
Humanist:We attempt to transcend divisive parochial loyalties based on
race, religion, gender, nationality, creed, class, or ethnicity, and
strive to work together for the good of humanity.
Libertarian:We seek a world free of legal barriers and boundaries which
now separate nations, races, and religions. The elimination of all laws
based on race, religion, gender, nationality, creed, class, or ethnicity
will be a major step forward in human progress.
Humanist:We want to protect and enhance the earth, to preserve it for
future generations, and to avoid inflicting needless suffering on other
species.
Libertarian:The desire to protect and enhance the earth is most evident
in the developed nations where basic survival needs are not in question
for most of the population. Only market forces can raise the standard of
living to this level. As the consumers become more sensitive to the
environment and the suffering of other species the producers must change
accordingly to survive.
Humanist:We believe in enjoying life here and now and in developing our
creative talents to the fullest.
Libertarian:We would lift all legal restrictions on consensual activities
to permit everyone to enjoy life as they see fit. Creative talents
develop to their fullest where there is the most open communication and
the least restrictions on behavior.
Humanist:We believe in the cultivation of moral excellence.
Libertarian:We believe that voluntary interactions cultivate and reward
moral excellence and that the government has no business dictating
morality.
Humanist:We respect the right to privacy. Mature adults should be
allowed to fulfill their aspirations, to express their sexual
preferences, to exercise reproductive freedom, to have access to
comprehensive and informed health-care, and to die with dignity.
Libertarian:We explicitly uphold the right to privacy and sexuality among
consenting adults. People should never go to jail for any consensual
activity connected with abortions or suicides. The most comprehensive
and informed health care will come when people are free from laws
restricting the practice of health care and empowered to create
institutions which meet real needs instead of enriching a protected
elite.
Humanist:We believe in the common moral decencies: altruism, integrity,
honesty, truthfulness, responsibility. Humanist ethics is amenable to
critical, rational guidance. There are normative standards that we
discover together. Moral principles are tested by their consequences.
Libertarian:We believe voluntary interactions encourage and reward
altruism, integrity, honesty, truthfulness, and responsibility. Moral
decency cannot be imposed from above, people develop their own standards
when they do not fear authority but instead evaluate the consequences of
their own behavior.
Humanist:We are deeply concerned with the moral education of our
children. We want to nourish reason and compassion.
Libertarian:Concern for the moral education of children has been a major
force against compulsory state educational systems. Most parents will
resist with all their resources when they see their children taught what
they believe is wrong. Reason and compassion are best nourished where
all ideas are free to compete.
Humanist:We are engaged by the arts no less than by the sciences.
Libertarian:Government sponsorship has distorted both the arts and the
sciences to their detriment. It should be ended. The angry response to
overtly sexual art mostly occurs where it is tax supported. The
criticism of expenditures for science is also mostly confined to
government projects.
Humanist:We are citizens of the universe and are excited by discoveries
still to be made in the cosmos.
Libertarian:We are strongly represented in space oriented and science
fiction organizations. Many younger libertarians plan to be among the
first space colonists and are exited about the commercialization of
space.
Humanist:We are skeptical of untested claims to knowledge, and we are
open to novel ideas and seek new departures in our thinking.
Libertarian:We are especially skeptical of untested claims to knowledge
and wisdom by our leaders. Libertarians are frequently criticized for
their openness to novel ideas.
Humanist:We affirm humanism as a realistic alternative to theologies of
despair and ideologies of violence and as a source of rich personal
significance and genuine satisfaction in the service of others.
Libertarian:We affirm libertarianism as a realistic alternative to the
ideology of violence characteristic of powerful governments. Only free
individuals can experience personal significance and enjoy genuine
service to others.
.c.Short Responses to Ten Key Green Values
This paper gives a short response to each question in a paper listing ten
key green values. Nobody has all the answers but libertarians see
excessive government at the root of most of the problems. Libertarians
want to limit government to national defense, police protection for
violent crime, and courts to arbitrate disputes. The Libertarian Party
has run presidential candidates since 1972 and their platform addresses
all major issues clearly and simply.
1. Ecological WisdomHow can we operate human societies with an
understanding that we are part of nature, not on top of it? Only by
understanding that we are part of society, and not on top of it. How can
we live within the ecological and resource limits of the planet, applying
our technological knowledge to the challenge of an energy-efficient
economy? Tax funded projects exceed ecological and resource limits worse
than private projects. The technology we need will evolve most rapidly
in an open market. How can we build a better relationship between cities
and countryside? Regulations and tax structures divide city from country
interests and set people against each other. How can we guarantee the
rights of non-human species? Only market processes can do this without
infringing on the rights of human beings. How can we promote sustainable
agriculture and respect for self-regulating natural systems? Present
agricultural policies are destroying both the environment and the farms.
Deregulation will allow sustainable agriculture to flourish. How can we
further biocentric wisdom in all spheres of life? State education never
teaches wisdom, alternative schooling can.
2. Grassroots DemocracyHow can we develop systems that allow and
encourage us to control the decisions that effect our lives? The
government doesn't want us to control our own lives and will suppress
systems that allow it. How can we ensure that representatives will be
fully accountable to the people who elected them? By not giving them
excessive power. How can we develop planning mechanisms that would allow
citizens to develop and implement their own preferences for policies and
spending priorities? Citizens constantly plan and implement their own
preferences and spending priorities in the market. Government interferes
with them. How can we encourage and assist the "mediating institutions"
-- family, neighborhood organization, church group, voluntary
association, ethnic club -- recover some of the functions now performed
by government? Join the libertarians; these are our goals. How can we
relearn the best insights from American traditions of civic vitality,
voluntary action, and community responsibility? Join the libertarians;
these are our traditions.
3. Personal and Social ResponsibilityHow can we respond to human
suffering in ways that promote dignity? Any system imaginable would
promote dignity better than government welfare. How can we encourage
people to commit themselves to lifestyles that promote their own health?
By making people (not government) responsible for their own health. How
can we have a community- controlled education system that effectively
teaches our children academic skills, ecological wisdom, social
responsibility, and personal growth? Such systems can only evolve in the
absence of compulsory government schools. How can we resolve
interpersonal and intergroup conflicts without just turning them over to
lawyers and judges? Paid arbitrators are a fast, fair, free market
alternative to institutional justice. How can we take responsibility for
reducing the crime rate in our neighborhoods? End the prohibition of
drugs to take the profit out of crime. End gun control to make violence
less safe for criminals. Focus all police activity on violent crime
instead of victimless crime. How can we encourage such values as
simplicity and moderation? By encouraging people to reject the
authoritarian and violent values fostered by government.
4. NonviolenceHow can we, as a society, develop effective alternatives
to our current patterns of violence at all levels, from the family and
the street to nations and the world? The Libertarian Party is explicitly
nonviolent and has a noninterventionist foreign policy. How can we
eliminate nuclear weapons from the face of the earth without being naive
about the intentions of governments? A libertarian nation would need few
missiles since it wouldn't be meddling in other countries affairs. How
can we most constructively use non-violent methods to oppose practices
and policies with which we disagree and in the process reduce the
atmosphere of polarization and selfishness that is itself a source of
violence? Libertarians are using non-violent methods to free us all from
oppressive government practices and policies (which promote polarization
and violence by forcing centralization and uniformity).
5. DecentralizationHow can we restore power and responsibility to
individuals, institutions, communities and regions? By taking power and
responsibility back from the government. How can we encourage the
flourishing of regionally-based culture rather than a dominant
monoculture? Government imposes a dominant monoculture. Reduce its
power and alternatives will flourish. How can we have a decentralized,
democratic society with our political, economic, and social institutions
locating power on the smallest scale (closest to home) that is efficient
and practical? Locate power in the individual. Only empowered
individuals can create such a society. How can we redesign our
institutions so that fewer decisions and less regulation over money are
granted as one moves from the community toward the national level? The
Libertarian Party platform calls for radical redesign of our government
institutions toward fewer decisions and less regulation over people and
money. How can we reconcile the need for community and regional selfdetermination with the need for appropriate centralized regulation in
certain matters? Libertarians are skeptical of the need for centralized
regulation in most matters. We favor individual self-determination.
6. Community-based EconomicsHow can we redesign our work structures to
encourage employee ownership and workplace democracy? The improved
morale and adaptability of employee owned democratic workplaces gives
them a competitive advantage over those with obsolete hierarchical
management. Deregulation will amplify this advantage. How can we
develop new economic activities and institutions that will allow us to
use our new technologies in ways that are humane, freeing, ecological,
and accountable and responsive to communities? Present government
policies form a major barrier to the development of appropriate new
activities and institutions. This barrier should be removed. How can we
move beyond the narrow "job ethic" to new definitions of "work," "jobs,"
and "income" that reflect the changing economy? State education and
regulations impose these obsolete concepts and obstruct change. How can
we restructure our patterns of income distribution to reflect the wealth
created by those outside the formal, monetary economy: those who take
responsibility for parenting, housekeeping, home gardens, community
volunteer work, etc.? We can each restructure the distribution of our
own income to reflect these values. How can we restrict the size and
concentrated power of corporations without discouraging superior
efficiency or technological innovation.? We give them size and power by
buying their products. If we don't buy, they don't survive.
7. Postpatriarchal ValuesHow can we replace the cultural ethics of
dominance and control with more cooperative ways of interacting?
Government is the biggest patriarchal institution in our culture. It is
based on the ethic of dominance and control. Reject the culture of
government and cooperation will blossom. How can we encourage people to
care about persons outside their own group? By removing barriers to
trade, travel, and charity. By abandoning the myth of the government
safety net. How can we promote the building of respectful, positive,
and responsible relationships across the lines of gender and other
divisions? Laws which now dictate our relationships destroy respect,
responsibility, and harmony. They should be repealed. How can we
encourage a rich, diverse political culture that respects feelings as
well as rationalist approaches? Libertarians welcome voluntary social
experimentation and the diversity it brings. How can we proceed with as
much respect for the means as well as the end (the process as much as the
products of our efforts)? Libertarians firmly reject the initiation of
force as a means of achieving any social or political end. How can we
learn to respect the contemplative, inner part of life as much as the
outer activities? Only if we have the leisure time generated by a free
and prosperous economy. 8. Respect for DiversityHow can we honor
cultural, ethnic, racial, sexual, religious and spiritual diversity
within the context of individual responsibility to all beings?
Government suppresses diversity and takes away responsibility. Reduce
its power. While honoring diversity, how can we reclaim our country's
finest shared ideals: the dignity of the individual, democratic
participation, and liberty and justice for all? Join the libertarians;
these are our ideals.
9. Global ResponsibilityHow can we be of genuine assistance to
grassroots groups in the Third World? By eliminating barriers to travel
and trade. By denouncing dictatorships in Third World nations. By
withdrawing our troops. What can we learn from such groups? How to
function in a dictatorship. How can we help other countries make the
transition to self-sufficiency in food and other basic necessities? By
eliminating barriers to travel and trade. By denouncing dictatorships in
Third World nations. By withdrawing our troops. How can we cut our
military budget while maintaining an adequate defense? By bringing our
troops home from foreign soil and ceasing our meddling in the internal
affairs of other sovereign nations. How can we promote these ten green
values in the reshaping of global order? By working with and through the
libertarians. How can we reshape world order without creating just
another enormous nation-state? By supporting the libertarian revolt
against oppressive governments everywhere.
10. Future FocusHow can we induce people and institutions to think in
terms of the long-range future, and not just in terms of their shortrange selfish interest? Short-range thinking is an adaptation to an
environment where government rules can change at any time and taxes
destroy long term investments. How can we encourage people to develop
their own visions of the future and move more effectively toward them?
By not allowing government to impose the vision of the few on the
unwilling many. How can we judge whether new technologies are socially
useful -- and use those judgments to improve our society? As consumers
we use our judgment to choose technology that improves our society. The
government spends our money on weapons and technology to control us.
How can we induce our government and other institutions to practice
fiscal responsibility? By withholding our support. How can we make the
quality of life, rather than open-ended economic growth, the focus of
future thinking? Whatever qualities you desire for your life, you are
more likely to get them from an open market than from any government
program or agency.
.c.Ecological Wisdom
This is a libertarian perspective on ecological wisdom.The questions are
from a paper on ten key values of the greens.
How can we operate human societies with an understanding that we are part
of nature, not on top of it? Only by understanding that we are part of
society, not on top of it. Human society is not separate from us. We
cannot "operate" people without dehumanizing them. We can change our
behaviors to reflect our beliefs. We can also encourage and inspire
others to change theirs. But forcing others to conform to our beliefs is
oppression.
How can we live within the ecological and resource limits of the planet,
applying our technological knowledge to the challenge of an energyefficient economy? As the availability of any resource starts to
dwindle, the price will rise. This rise in price is the most certain,
fair, and automatic way to conserve any resource. Not only does it
require no rules or bureaucracy but it generates the funds to finance the
creation of alternatives. The rise in price of a resource causes the
alternatives to become economically viable. The increasing cost of
vanishing resources not only causes universal conservation and the search
for alternatives but funds the development of alternative technologies
without any need for central control or planning. Centrally planned tax
funded projects often exceed ecological and resource limits worse than
private projects. Government is without question one of the worst
despoilers of the environment and wasters of resources. Countries such
as the former Soviet Union, where the government took complete
responsibility for the environment, have suffered environmental
catastrophes far worse than anything the market would ever produce.
How can we build a better relationship between cities and countryside?
The relationship between city and country interests should be symbiotic
and harmonious. Each forms a market for the goods and services produced
by the other. Regulations and tax structures divide city from country
interests and set people against each other. City planners often use
their power to take control of the land from country dwellers creating an
adversarial relationship. The different cultures which arise in the city
and country should provide enrichment and entertainment for everyone.
When a strong government imposes the same cultural values on both the
former harmony is replaced by fear of forced change to an alien culture.
How can we guarantee the rights of non-human species? Kindness to
animals is a cultural trend which we applaud and expect to continue. But
enforcement of any guarantee would require violence against humans who
disagreed and thereby constitute a violation of human rights. Increasing
consumer awareness has lead many producers of foods and cosmetics to
change their practices in order to avoid losing market share to their
more sensitive competitors. This is a natural, appropriate, and
nonviolent way to improve the treatment of animals.
How can we promote sustainable agriculture and respect for selfregulating natural systems? Self regulating natural systems are the most
efficient and economical for the farmer in the absence of senseless
bureaucratic interference but present national and state agricultural
policies are destroying both the environment and the farms. Government
subsidies and regulations have led to the evolution of a wasteful and
polluting agricultural system. Subsidies favor larger over smaller farms
and tax structures encourage excessive investment in fertilizer and
capital equipment. The inheritance tax in particular has forced family
farms to incorporate to avoid being eaten away. Deregulation will allow
sustainable agriculture to flourish.
How can we further biocentric wisdom in all spheres of life? The
political and cultural agendas of government run schools rarely include
biocentric wisdom since that pressure group is not as well funded as
others. It is not in the interest of the government that the people
learn biocentric wisdom since this might make them skeptical of
bureaucratic central control. The more influence the government has on
our daily lives, the media, and the educational system, the less we will
be exposed to biocentric wisdom in these spheres. Compulsory state
education is not teaching biocentric wisdom, alternative schooling can.
.c.Grassroots Democracy
This is a libertarian perspective on grassroots democracy.The questions
are from a paper on ten key values of the greens.
How can we develop systems that allow and encourage us to control the
decisions that effect our lives? By reducing the ability of the
government to prevent us from controlling the decisions in our lives.
People like to control their own lives but the mission of government is
to prevent people from controlling their lives. The more we support it
and give it power the less control we will have. It is a reflection of
how far we have fallen that we need to develop systems to "allow" us to
control our lives.
How can we ensure that representatives will be fully accountable to the
people who elected them? By not giving them excessive power. The
egotism and disrespect shown by our "representatives" is so blatant as to
need no comment. The anti-incumbent, anti-tax, and term limitation
movements are positive signs that the people are waking up to how badly
their trust has been abused and taking positive action towards change.
How can we develop planning mechanisms that would allow citizens to
develop and implement their own preferences for policies and spending
priorities? People constantly plan and implement their own preferences
and spending priorities when government allows them. Every time you
purchase any kind of goods or services you implement your preferences and
spending priorities. Attempting to control the way your money is spent
after the government has taken it away from you is hopeless but your own
spending preferences and priorities are manifested every time you buy
anything. Tariffs are a deliberate effort to alter spending priorities
geographically. People addicted to nicotine and alcohol are impoverished
by misguided governmental efforts to control their spending priorities by
imposing excessive taxes. Graduated income taxes are intended to prevent
the wealthy from implementing their spending priorities.
How can we encourage and assist the "mediating institutions" -- family,
neighborhood organization, church group, voluntary association, ethnic
club -- recover some of the functions now performed by government? Join
the libertarians; these are our goals. Taking power back from the
government is the main goal of the libertarian movement. Mediating
institutions won't need any encouragement or assistance once they are
allowed back into their rightful niche in society. They will grow into
their functions naturally since they reflect the genuine will of the
people. Libertarians are tightly focused on transferring power away from
the government and thus empowering other institutions such as families,
neighborhood organizations, church groups, voluntary associations, and
ethnic clubs.
How can we relearn the best insights from American traditions of civic
vitality, voluntary action, and community responsibility? Join the
libertarians; these are our traditions. All these traditions were strong
when the government was weak. Regulations often interfere with civic
vitality, voluntary action, and community responsibility. There is a
direct conflict between the growth of centralized control and these
traditions.
.c.Personal and Social Responsibility
This is a libertarian perspective on personal and social
responsibility.The questions are from a paper on ten key values of the
greens.
How can we respond to human suffering in ways that promote dignity? A
giant impersonal bureaucracy financed by involuntary taxation has
replaced the thousands of diverse institutions that used to respond to
human suffering. Only the libertarians have the courage to declare the
welfare system a disaster and call for its end. Humans want to respond
to human suffering but the system imposed on us now is the worst of all
possible ways and it inhibits the evolution of more humane alternatives.
How can we encourage people to commit themselves to lifestyles that
promote their own health? By making people (not government) responsible
for their own health. Medical knowledge, medical tools, and medical
skills have been restricted by law to a wealthy elite. Knowledge, tools,
and skills need to be allowed into the population so everyone can learn
about and do more of their own medicine and their own health. The FDA
must lose its power to withhold lifesaving drugs from the people. The
AMA must lose its power to put people in jail for practicing healing
arts. The present cultural trends toward healthier lifestyles are
encouraging and will accelerate if people are given greater
responsibility.
How can we have a community- controlled education system that effectively
teaches our children academic skills, ecological wisdom, social
responsibility, and personal growth? Such systems can only evolve in the
absence of compulsory government schools. The education system does not
need to be "controlled" any more than the entertainment system. Since we
want our children to acquire certain skills and knowledge a market in
education will make these available without the need for any centralized
control. The political instead of educational agenda of compulsory
schools teaches only obedience and servility. Let people purchase
whatever education they want and the educational institutions will
compete to provide it.
How can we resolve interpersonal and intergroup conflicts without just
turning them over to lawyers and judges? Paid arbitrators and mediators
are a fast, fair, free market alternative to governmental justice. All
that is necessary is for both parties to agree to abide by the decision
of an arbitrator and pay their (usually reasonable) fee. Since
arbitrators are in the business of marketing justice they try to provide
the best quality at a reasonable price. If they become slow, corrupt, or
overly expensive they will lose business to competing arbitrators.
How can we take responsibility for reducing the crime rate in our
neighborhoods? End the prohibition of drugs to take the profit out of
crime. End gun control to make violence less safe for criminals. Focus
all police activity on violent crime instead of victimless crime. The
drug war is responsible for most violent crime and should be abandoned
immediately before more lives are lost. The libertarians are the largest
organization with the courage to state the obvious; the drug war is bogus
and violence will continue to increase until we end it. The government
has also aggravated the neighborhood crime problem by disarming the
peaceful honest people. Most people hate violence and it can only
flourish where the majority of the people are deliberately rendered
powerless to intervene. This allows the violent minority to terrorize
the peaceful majority with impunity. The people then support the
building of more jails and the writing of more laws without realizing
that this approach will never solve the problem. The United States
already has a higher percentage of its population behind bars than any
other nation and half of them are there for victimless crimes. This is
absurd. If the government would empower the people instead of trying to
mother them the problem would be solved.
How can we encourage such values as simplicity and moderation? By
encouraging people to reject the authoritarian and violent values
fostered by government. Simplicity and moderation don't come from
government. They come from the peace and harmony that can only flourish
in an atmosphere free of fear and distrust.
.c.Nonviolence
This is a libertarian perspective on nonviolence.The questions are from a
paper on ten key values of the greens.
How can we, as a society, develop effective alternatives to our current
patterns of violence at all levels, from the family and the street to
nations and the world? The Libertarian Party is explicitly nonviolent
and has a noninterventionist foreign policy. Many of our current
patterns of violence have their roots in our own oppression. The
justification of violent means to enforce trivial laws promotes the
acceptance of violence to settle disputes. The rampant violence in the
drug trade is wholly attributable to the misguided and unwinnable drug
war declared on the people by the government. This policy raises prices
to absurd levels making theft necessary to support otherwise cheap drug
habits. A second policy that encourages violence in the drug trade is
the absence of enforceable contracts or protection of property rights.
If the government refused to enforce contracts involving jewelry or
acknowledge anyone's right to possess jewelry there would certainly be a
lot of violence connected with the jewelry trade. Only the libertarians
explicitly call for the withdrawal of our troops from foreign soil; a
major step toward global peace.
How can we eliminate nuclear weapons from the face of the earth without
being naive about the intentions of governments? A libertarian nation
would need few missiles since it wouldn't be meddling in other countries
affairs. The Libertarian Party platform explicitly calls for the
withdrawal of all of our troops from foreign soil. In spite of their
availability for many years atomic weapons remain limited to the defense
forces of national governments. The only reason they have not been used
by terrorists is their global unpopularity. Nonintervention is not
naiveté. We can recognize that bloodthirsty despots rule many
nations and still see the wisdom in not meddling in their affairs. Our
intervention often makes them stronger and more hostile. Instead we can
show the people of oppressed nations how much better off they could be
without their oppressors. We can lead by example. As governments
everywhere become less powerful and less hostile the world will become a
safer place and the need for atomic weapons will fade away.
How can we most constructively use non-violent methods to oppose
practices and policies with which we disagree and in the process reduce
the atmosphere of polarization and selfishness that is itself a source of
violence? Libertarians are using non-violent methods to free us all from
oppressive government practices and policies (which promote polarization
and violence by forcing centralization and uniformity). There is a broad
spectrum of non-violent means available today. The boycott is powerful
and effective against anyone doing business with the public. The
electoral process is also available to express public disapproval of
misguided policies. Civil disobedience has a history of success mainly
through the media attention it draws.
Polarization is reduced between people who want to do business. The boss
is always right and so is the customer. Violence will be reduced to its
lowest point in an environment with the most opportunities to acquire and
maintain wealth by nonviolent means.
.c.Decentralization
This is a libertarian perspective on decentralization.The questions are
from a paper on ten key values of the greens.
How can we restore power and responsibility to individuals, institutions,
communities and regions? By taking power and responsibility back from
the government. The power that used to be held by individuals,
institutions, communities and regions has in recent times been seized by
the central government with its myriad agencies and bureaucrats.
Libertarians call for massive reduction of government power and the
return of responsibility and power to individuals.
How can we encourage the flourishing of regionally-based culture rather
than a dominant monoculture? Government imposes a dominant monoculture.
Reduce its power and alternatives will flourish. The traditional
regional cultures used to be a source of pride and profit to the people.
The dominant national government imposes uniform standards and practices
without regard for regional differences. When its power is reduced the
regional differences will grow and the harmonious diversity we used to
enjoy will return.
How can we have a decentralized, democratic society with our political,
economic, and social institutions locating power on the smallest scale
(closest to home) that is efficient and practical? Locate power in the
individual. Empowered individuals can create such a society but it
cannot be imposed from above. Individuals are the most efficient and
practical scale for the location of power since they will use their power
to create voluntary political, economic, and social institutions to meet
their diverse needs. The most decentralized and democratic society is
the one with the most fully empowered individuals. This is the goal of
the libertarians.
How can we redesign our institutions so that fewer decisions and less
regulation over money are granted as one moves from the community toward
the national level? The Libertarian Party platform calls for radical
redesign of our national government institutions toward fewer decisions
and less regulation over people and money. Libertarians would like to
limit our national level decisions and regulations to the barest minimum.
How can we reconcile the need for community and regional selfdetermination with the need for appropriate centralized regulation in
certain matters? Libertarians are skeptical of the need for centralized
regulation in most matters. We favor individual self-determination.
Regulations are usually self defeating, often amplifying the very
problems they were intended to solve. Individuals are naturally selfdetermining unless they are forcibly prevented by regulations. Community
and regional self-determination can only grow when the power of the
national government over communities and regions is diminished.
.c.Community-based Economics
This is a libertarian perspective on community-based economics.The
questions are from a paper on ten key values of the greens.
How can we redesign our work structures to encourage employee ownership
and workplace democracy? The improved morale and adaptability of
employee owned democratic workplaces gives them a competitive advantage
over those with obsolete hierarchical management. Deregulation will
amplify this advantage. Redesign of work structures grows more important
every day as the international business climate changes. Only the most
flexible and responsive businesses will survive in this environment of
ever accelerating change. Government regulations freeze and stifle
structural change in the workplace, preventing the experimentation and
evolution necessary in today's global economy.
How can we develop new economic activities and institutions that will
allow us to use our new technologies in ways that are humane, freeing,
ecological, and accountable and responsive to communities? Present
government policies prevent the development of appropriate new activities
and institutions. The evolution of new economic activities and
institutions rarely comes from the central authorities but rather from
creative individuals and organizations. People everywhere want to use
technology in humane, freeing, and ecological ways but they are often
prevented by a web of archaic and outdated regulations imposed by the
central government and its bureaucrats.
How can we move beyond the narrow "job ethic" to new definitions of
"work," "jobs," and "income" that reflect the changing economy? State
education and regulations impose these obsolete concepts and obstruct
change. New and diverse relationships between people who create their
own definitions among themselves of "work", "jobs" and "income" usually
must be created in spite of and in opposition to the prevailing legal
definitions of these things by such agencies as the IRS.
How can we restructure our patterns of income distribution to reflect the
wealth created by those outside the formal, monetary economy: those who
take responsibility for parenting, housekeeping, home gardens, community
volunteer work, etc.? We can each restructure the distribution of our
own income to reward those around us who perform these services. We
benefit from our own such efforts in both monetary and nonmonetary ways.
People are forced out of (or into) the monetary economy by the IRS and
other regulators.
How can we restrict the size and concentrated power of corporations
without discouraging superior efficiency or technological innovation? We
give them size and power by buying their products. If we don't buy, they
don't survive. The advantage of size is amplified in a heavily regulated
society since large firms can more easily sustain the additional expense
and effort the regulations require. Large corporations can also afford
to send lobbyists to Washington to create regulations which suppress
smaller and more innovative competing firms. The thousands of small
businesses each with their own ideas should be free to compete on an
equal footing with the giants. Regulations obstruct them, encouraging
the giants and punishing the innovators. Libertarians generally favor
strict liability and some feel the limited liability of corporations
encourages their irresponsible behavior.
.c.Postpatriarchal Values
This is a libertarian perspective on postpatriarchal values.The questions
are from a paper on ten key values of the greens.
How can we replace the cultural ethics of dominance and control with more
cooperative ways of interacting? Government is the main patriarchal
institution in our culture. It is based on the ethic of dominance and
control. Reject the patriarchal culture of government and cooperation
will blossom. Free the schools. Free the airwaves. Withhold your
support of government and avoid dependence on it. Goals which can only
be met by dominance and control (government action) are patriarchal
goals.
How can we encourage people to care about persons outside their own
group? By removing barriers to communication, trade, travel, and
charity. By abandoning the myth of the government safety net. Caring
grows where there is no exploitation or restriction but through taxes and
regulations we exploit and restrict each other needlessly.
How can we promote the building of respectful, positive, and responsible
relationships across the lines of gender and other divisions?
Respectful, positive, and responsible relationships cannot be created by
law. Laws which dictate our relationships create an atmosphere of
oppression which destroys respect, responsibility, and harmony. Only
when these laws have been repealed will we see real progress. Merchants
everywhere compete to build respectful, positive, and responsible
relationships with their customers in spite of legal, natural, and
cultural divisions. Libertarians are working to remove the legal
divisions between people everywhere.
How can we encourage a rich, diverse political culture that respects
feelings as well as rationalist approaches? Libertarians welcome
voluntary social experimentation and the diversity it brings. Government
seldom encourages political diversity and rarely shows respect for
feelings. Only a libertarian administration can accept political
experimentation and allow any voluntary system to evolve and flourish.
Some political cultures respect feelings and some do not. Prohibiting
the initiation of force eliminates fear of violent retribution for the
expression of feelings.
How can we proceed with as much respect for the means as well as the end
(the process as much as the products of our efforts)? Libertarianism is
means oriented. Party members must sign a pledge that they reject the
initiation of force as a means of achieving any social or political goal.
The exclusion of violence is a unique and identifying characteristic of
libertarianism. History shows us again and again how powerful and well
meaning rulers using violent means have created only destruction and
misery in spite of their best intentions. Libertarians believe the
process of violence poisons the products of anyone's efforts, no matter
how well intentioned.
How can we learn to respect the contemplative, inner part of life as much
as the outer activities? Only if we have the leisure time generated by a
free and prosperous economy. People become contemplative when their
material needs are met and no system generates as much material wealth as
the free market. Eliminating all censorship and other barriers to
communication encourages exploration of our inner selves and sharing of
what we learn.
.c.Respect for Diversity
This is a libertarian perspective on respect for diversity.The questions
are from a paper on ten key values of the greens.
How can we honor cultural, ethnic, racial, sexual, religious and
spiritual diversity within the context of individual responsibility to
all beings? There is no conflict between honor for diversity and
individual responsibility. They reinforce each other since a heightened
sense of individuality promotes awareness of the vast differences between
people. Genuine honor and respect must come from the individual and
cannot be imposed from without by threats of punishment for
noncompliance. Yet the government routinely punishes those who do not
pretend to accept those cultural, ethnic, racial, sexual, religious, and
spiritual people and practices which have obtained political power. The
normal and natural resistance and resentment people feel to being pushed
around is then mistakenly directed toward the people and practices forced
upon them by the regulations. The outcome is suspicion and hostility
which would not have occurred in the absence of regulation. The
libertarians stress individual responsibility in all areas and honor the
cultural, ethnic, racial, sexual, religious, and spiritual diversity
which comes with it. The government suppresses diversity and takes away
responsibility. Reduce its power and allow people to learn to live in
harmony at their own pace instead of trying to compel respect and
understanding.
While honoring diversity, how can we reclaim our country's finest shared
ideals: the dignity of the individual, democratic participation, and
liberty and justice for all? None have more respect for diversity or are
more concerned about the dignity of the individual than the libertarians.
For. Most third world nations could export food if they were not ruled
by dictators who were intent on controlling the food supply to control
the people.
How can we cut our military budget while maintaining an adequate defense?
By bringing our troops home from foreign soil and ceasing our meddling in
the internal affairs of other sovereign nations. Only the Libertarian
Party is willing to take the step toward world peace of withdrawing our
troops from foreign soil yet what could be more obvious? This simple
step would cut the military budget dramatically and the money paid to our
troops would be spent here on domestic goods and services. Our constant
and costly meddling in the internal affairs of sovereign nations has
promoted hostility and conflict all over the world and made us countless
angry enemies. There is no excuse for this, it is contrary to our
character as a people and our self interest as a nation.
How can we promote these ten green values in the reshaping of global
order? By working with and through the libertarians. Only the
libertarians have been working consistently for twenty years toward the
promotion of these values all over the world. Only the libertarians have
consistently opposed the emergence of new and more powerful global
governments who's idea of global order is global slavery.
How can we reshape world order without creating just another enormous
nation-state? By supporting the libertarian revolt against oppressive
governments everywhere. Libertarians are adamant and focused against the
increasing power of national and supernational governments everywhere.
World order is being dramatically reshaped by a global libertarian
revolution as people everywhere are waking up and throwing off their
oppressors. Join the nonviolent revolution, join the libertarians.
.c.Future Focus
This is a libertarian perspective on future focus.The questions are from
a paper on ten key values of the greens.
How can we induce people and institutions to think in terms of the longrange future, and not just in terms of their short-range selfish
interest? Short-range thinking is an adaptation to an environment where
regulations can change at any time and taxes destroy long term
investments. People and institutions used to have much longer range
plans but these proved to be maladaptive in today's world. Inheritance
taxes destroy family farms, capital gains taxes destroy long term
investment. The IRS promotes investment in insane and nonproductive tax
shelters. The long range future has been poisoned by the prospect of
ever increasing government intrusion thus forcing people into short range
planning. It is hard to plan for changes in the market but it is
impossible to plan for changes in the regulations. People can and will
plan more rationally in a deregulated economy.
How can we encourage people to develop their own visions of the future
and move more effectively toward them? By not allowing government to
impose the vision of the few on the unwilling many. People all have
their own visions and one of the main barriers to the attainment of these
visions is the wall of bureaucracy and regulation faced by anyone with
new cultural, technological, or business ideas. Tear down these walls
and the visions of the people will flourish.
How can we judge whether new technologies are socially useful -- and use
those judgments to improve our society? As consumers we use our judgment
to choose technology that improves our lives and thus our society. The
government spends our money on weapons to control us and civil
engineering projects that destroy our environment. More people are
becoming more socially conscious all the time and their spending habits
reflect this growing awareness. If we, as consumers, purchase socially
useful technology that is what the market will produce.
How can we induce our government and other institutions to practice
fiscal responsibility? By withholding our support. It is unreasonable
to expect elected officials not to spend the money they are allocated.
Fiscal responsibility is a natural response to limited resources. It is
our responsibility as citizens to limit the resources we allocate to
government by rejecting new taxes and protesting present ones. The tax
protests and balanced budget movements show that people are becoming
aware and active on this issue. Work with them, work with us.
How can we make the quality of life, rather than open-ended economic
growth, the focus of future thinking? Whatever qualities you desire for
your life, you are more likely to get them from an open market than from
any government program or agency. For people who have lived generations
in grinding poverty economic growth is strongly associated with quality
of life and it would be unjust to deny them the opportunity to experience
it. Those who seek quality of life improvements in other ways will often
find those other ways blocked by government regulations. Libertarians
want to remove the burden of heavy taxes from those who seek economic
growth and to remove the barrier of excessive regulation from those who
seek other ways to improve their quality of life.
.c.Universal Parents
Three different types of believers have a similar thought pattern.
Fundamentalist:God is in control and would never harm his children so as
a child of God I am safe. Those who oppose God threaten my safety so I
must enforce God's will against all who oppose it.
Socialist:The government is in control and would never harm its subjects
so as a loyal subject I am safe. Those who oppose the government
threaten my safety so I must enforce the will of the government against
all who oppose it.
Environmentalist:Nature should be in control and would never harm her
children so as nature's child I am safe. Those who oppose nature
threaten my safety so I must enforce nature's way against all who oppose
it.
In many places the majority believe God is in control and they are the
children of God. The bible says God would never hurt his children.
Fundamentalists rail against immorality because it challenges God's
authority and thus threatens their safety. If people can disobey God
with impunity then all security and safety is lost and the world is a
frightening place with no certain limits on what people can do.
Government schools and mass media tell us the government is in control.
The uproar when veterans are mistreated or the police are killed by mere
citizens reveals a belief that the government should never let its
subjects be harmed. Socialists rail against those who challenge the
government's power because it threatens their safety. If people can
disobey regulations with impunity then all security and safety is lost
and the world is a frightening place with no certain limits on what
people can do.
Unlike the previous two cases nature is often not in control but the
environmentalist believes she should be. The assumption that nature
would never harm her children is shown by environmentalists who ignore
the harmfulness of natural toxins and carcinogens. Environmentalists
rail against scientists and engineers who challenge nature's control and
thus threaten the safety of nature's children. If people can defy nature
with impunity then all security and safety is lost and the world is a
frightening place with no certain limits on what people can do.
In each case a childhood emotional dynamic has been retained into
adulthood. God, government, or nature assumes the role of a child's
parents to become a universal parent for adults. Believers can't be
reasoned out of their loyalties any more than a child can be reasoned out
of family loyalty.
Normal adults develop powers of observation and reasoning sufficient to
overcome childhood dependencies and assume individual responsibility for
thought and action. The growth of these powers is reduced however if the
environment of the child is flooded with superficial positive images of
God, government, and nature.
The development of objectivity is further complicated by the adolescent
thrill of rebellion against authority. Angry adolescent rebellion and
independent adult thought are both pleasurable and therefore easily
confused. Some will see this essay as mere rebellion against authority
but I believe my thrill comes from the discovery of hidden patterns
because I also feel it when solving other types of puzzles.
.c.Gift Markets
Those of you who came to libertarianism like I did, through economics,
probably have a special fondness for the idea of transactions.
Transactions are the great equalizer and maker of friends. Any two
people who trade are acting as partners and both benefit or they wouldn't
participate. The objectivists especially emphasize the difference
between transaction and theft as a conceptual tool for illustrating the
difference between market and government.
It may come as a surprise therefore, when I say that transactions are not
the atom of economics, gifts are. Transactions are just gifts bound
together in pairs like the atoms of nitrogen in the air. Just as
nitrogen is inert when the atoms are paired, transactions are
tremendously useful compared to other gift giving customs. We give away
our money to strangers because we have the expectation that these
strangers will then give us merchandise. Without this pairing we would
have to individually know and trust everyone we dealt with. Only in
small groups like families and tribes can this be the case.
Gifts also provide a way to extend the idea of a free market to primitive
cultures. Sometimes these societies don't have anything we could really
call a market economy but are instead permeated with elaborate gift
giving rituals. A citizen's status and whole life may be determined by
the gifts they give.
Where gift giving exists in any culture personal property exists there
also. Only what is owned can be given, only by the owner, and the
receiver becomes the new owner. Many view ownership as evil and greedy,
but who abolishes ownership also abolishes gift giving.
The idea of gifts extends to the emotional and psychological realm. We
give our attention, our time, to those around us. You give to others by
talking, listening, making love, playing chess, rescuing from drowning,
etc., it is a benevolent expression of personal power. It might seem
that we have power over others by threatening withdrawal, but if the gift
is withdrawn the power vanishes.
Gift giving can be extended to include all the things we do for others
and all they do for us. We all know people who seem to do well in life
without working. They have found other ways, such as charm, to cause
people to give them what they need. We give labor to our children,
parents, and lovers because we want them to be happy. We give labor to
our bosses because they give us money. We give money to merchants
because when we do they give us the things we want.
Gift giving puts a whole different perspective on theft. Suppose someone
breaks into my house and steals something. I can take the attitude that
I have accidentally made them a gift, and take care not to have such
accidents in the future. I may find myself in a dark alley giving my
wallet to a stranger with a knife. The gift isn't an accident but the
situation is. This shifts my perspective from right vs wrong to caution
vs carelessness. This attitude toward robbery can now be applied to
taxes without any moral confusion. Instead of wasting time on anger you
can immediately look for ways to improve the situation.
Even violence and aggression are describable in terms of gifts.
Everything from a neighbor's dog barking to a bullet wound can be
considered unwanted gifts. You may think of new ways to deal with
aggression by looking at it this way.
What does the government give us? Let's ignore those cases where it
provides money to a specific person like a welfare recipient. Whatever
it gives must first have been given to it by taxpayers, usually many
times over. Perhaps what government gives is law, order, authority. The
need for authority is strong in many people. They are getting value for
value, a feeling of being in the right in return for some of their income
and autonomy. The problem of government doesn't lie with them, for them
it is a solution, albeit a bad one, to a significant need.
The punch
line is that these needs can be easily met without government. The world
is full of churches and businesses telling their members and employees
just how to behave. Businesses pay well for obedience and a church will
assure you that you are superior in the eyes of the Lord as long as you
do as they say.
This essay is my gift to you. Look at your personal, economic, and
political behavior in terms of gift giving and see what happens.
.c.Looking Inward
Essays from a talk delivered at the 1986 convention of theLibertarian
Party of Florida by Harry Reid
Some of you remember me from the 1984 state convention where I spoke
mainly of techniques of communication with nonlibertarians. This was
looking outward, trying to see out from libertarianism to see things
through the eyes of others and understand their feelings. This time is
different. This time we will be looking inward, subjecting
libertarianism itself to scrutiny from different perspectives and
examining some aspects that, I hope, you will find useful or at least
entertaining.
Bilge water
I will begin with my own perspective on what internal disagreement I have
observed within the ranks of the libertarian movement. I give you two
images. First, arguing amongst ourselves about the difference between
little government and no government is like arguing about the right
amount of bilge water for a boat while the boat is sinking under the
waves. Perhaps a little bilge water does no harm, perhaps not. Right
now let us realize our mutual interest in staying afloat and bail.
Second image: arguing about the right amount of government society needs
is like arguing about whether you need a fire in your house to keep warm
while the house is burning down around you. Again, let us work together
to bring the government under some kind of control.
Until we have a
small government it will be impossible to know the effects of reducing it
further. Unless we make the government smaller, it may become impossible
for us to continue to exist on this planet at all.
Iceberg
Close your eyes and envision an iceberg. See the whiteness, the waves,
perhaps birds flying about. How many envisioned the part that was below
the waterline, even though you knew that was most of it? This is how I
perceive the Libertarian Party, the tip of the iceberg. It's only a
small part of a big movement but it's the only part most people see,
indeed the only part most people can see. What I will talk about is
largely the part underwater. Not just the large number of silent
sympathizers out there but the inner workings of the ideology itself.
The libertarianism between your ears.
The rest of us
The problem of government actions can often be seen as the problem of the
rest of us. When the Apple Macintosh computer was first advertised they
used the slogan "The computer for the rest of us."
The slogan applies
to libertarians in some ways. Many envision government supported health
care as a good thing for all concerned and I have no quarrel with their
joining forces and doing it among themselves. But what about the rest of
us, who may disagree, we're forced to pay for it anyway. The media find
it easy to cover the people with the plans and schemes for solving
everybody's problems, but they find it very hard to cover the rest of us.
Wanting to control your neighbor's life is news, living your own life
independently is not news. Failing to cope is news, coping isn't.
Visions
Folks tell me of their visions of society and how the world could change
and be a better place. I try not to oppose these visions, instead I ask
if there is some way to achieve them without violence. This is one of
the bottom lines, the pivot point between our friends and enemies. If
someone has a plan for society, no matter how regimented, and wants to
bring it forth completely without violence or the threat of violence, we
do not oppose that. Libertarians are the only ones, in fact, who can be
absolutely relied upon to permit any nonviolent social experiment. Most
idealists abhor the violence in their vision of society, so most will
agree with you in rejecting it. Work with that agreement, and stress
that this is the only objection you have to their vision. Show them ways
the government obstructs their goals, describe likely future
obstructions. Remind them how horribly wrong many visions have gone when
implemented by the government and how well others have turned out when
implemented voluntarily. People should not have to abandon their visions
to become libertarian sympathizers and even supporters. All they have to
do is believe that their vision stands a better chance with us than with
the republicans or democrats.
Information power
One of the reasons I feel optimistic about our movement in the long run
is that we are entering the information age. As more information becomes
available in more useful form to everyone, it will become clearer that
government works badly, if at all, as a means to achieve social ends.
This process has already begun.
A good friend of mine pointed out a
significant long term trend in movies. When was the last time you saw a
movie where the government was portrayed as the good guys? Even on cop
shows the heroes are generally either somewhat independent of the
politicians or working past them and in spite of them. In the sixties
though, it was still possible for politicians to be heroes, not any more,
and never again.
Information is also a useful viewpoint on the question of property vs
politics as an allocation of decision making power in a society. If the
allocation is based on property, a person can make almost any decisions
about certain things and within a certain area. Outside this area when
dealing with others they are limited by the need for the agreement with
the owners. When decision making power is allocated by political
process, the decisions you make touch thousands of people throughout the
society and their decisions touch you. You control by threat the lives
of people you will never meet and they control your life by threat also.
Since the process is not individual there is a need for some elaborate
protocol for generating or pretending to generate agreement. Which
approach will result in the highest quality decisions? In the property
case your decisions are all concerning the things nearest and dearest to
you. The consequences of good or bad decisions come quickly and
naturally to you and increase or decrease your influence by increasing or
decreasing your property. These are optimum conditions for intelligent
decision making and fast learning. With political process you are making
decisions based on hearsay, through an elaborate agreement generating
protocol, concerning the lives and lifestyles of people you will never
meet. How much easier it is to make bad decisions and never know the
consequences of them.
.c.What are Rights?
Descriptions of libertarianism generally emphasize individual rights and
property rights. But rights come in all sorts of flavors, such as the
right to work, the right of free speech, the right to keep and bear arms,
the right to free medical treatment etc, they go on and on. Most folk,
including most libertarians, separate the rights into two piles labeled
"real" and "not real". Sorting rules are part of each ideology.
Perhaps the feeling of having rights is related to the feeling of being
in the right and rights can be understood as emotional experiences. Our
pets experience a range of emotions without much abstract thought,
consider a dog's right to a bone. If you don't think the dog has this
right you will deal with the dog's teeth. Although the dog has no
explicit conception of rights, he behaves just as if he did. The only
thing in question is your agreement with the dog.
Suppose we replace the word "right" with "agreement". What's changed?
For one thing, there is little misunderstanding about agreement and a lot
of misunderstanding about right. Suppose we had an agreement of free
speech, an agreement to keep and bear arms, an agreement to life,
liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. With whom would we have these
agreements? With each other? With the government? Do rights exist for
those who disagree? Do rights exist whether anyone agrees or not? Is it
possible to have rights you yourself disagree with? It is certainly
possible to not have rights that you think you have, witness someone
explaining their right to free medical care to a libertarian.
To a human being in isolation, rights are irrelevant. Therefore the word
must describe some human interaction. What human interaction is referred
to by the word 'right'? Perhaps restraint from violence. If you believe
someone has the right to bear arms and speak freely then you don't
believe in using violence to stop them. Either you believe in the
rights, or you believe in using violence to stop the behaviors. The word
right might mean negative violence, nonviolence. Cold is just the
absence of heat and rights are just the absence of violence. If rights
can be seen as the right to nonviolence and rights can be seen as
agreements, then rights can be seen as agreements to nonviolence.
People who believe I have a right to free speech will not violently
interfere in my speaking. People who agree with my right to property
will not take it from me violently. People who believe a dog has a right
to a bone won't take the bone from him. One major difference between
rights and agreements is that rights are abstract and presumed to apply
to everyone whereas agreements are concrete, individual things created by
the people interacting. There are a limited number of rights, but the
number of agreements is huge. Many feel oppressed, that their rights
have been violated. Try saying instead that the agreement has been
broken.
Rights are not something you have or don't have in any absolute
sense, they are the agreements between you and the people around you.
My agreement with a dog's right to a bone may be based on abstract
principles, fear of being bitten, or just laziness. The dog doesn't care
except to add to my fear of being bitten by growling. If I take the bone
he may hide it next time making my agreement unnecessary. In the same
way, I would not expect the police to respect my right to own a bag of
marijuana. If I were to own such a thing I would surely keep it secret
from them and only share knowledge of it with people who agree with my
right to keep it.
It is difficult to ponder "Do I have a right?" when a new situation
arises. Much easier to ask "Do I have an agreement?". Those who believe
in the right to free medical care are promoting an agreement to pay for
each others medical care. The amount of agreement determines the
strength of the right. I'm sure there are strong arguments on each side
of the right to go barefoot but if it is looked at as an agreement with
those around you there is little to argue about. The only thing that
distinguishes a nudist park from anywhere else is that the people there
have an agreement of nonviolence regarding nudity. In a nudist park
there is a right to not wear any clothing, a right which doesn't extend
to the neighborhood grocery store.
The question of what rights do we have becomes what agreements have we
made. Perhaps the concept of rights as agreements can help bridge the
gap between the abstract principle of rights and our day to day dealings
with people around us.
.c.The Ferengi Phenomenon
Fictional futures illustrate the values promoted by television media
today. Those who don't watch Star Trek may be startled by my
observations but you can observe for yourself or ask one of the many
"trekkies" who are familiar with the series.
In Star Trek, the Next Generation (the new series) there are two alien
races still around from the original series: the klingons (fierce but
honorable) and the romulans (like the klingons but sneaky). The klingons
have signed a peace treaty and one even serves on our side. The romulans
are still an enemy but their goals of empire aren't much different from
ours and they are also (sometimes) honorable. In the original Star Trek
there were no absolutely bad alien races. When aliens did bad things it
was for some good reason, often discovered in the ending scene.
The new series has introduced some new and unpleasant aliens but they
generally have latent virtues. The cardasians appear mean but have been
brutalized by prolonged warfare. The borg appear robotic but are
becoming more human with each encounter.
Toward the end of the first season the ferengi were introduced. They had
no redeeming qualities whatsoever. They were rat like and hateful in
every way. They always whined or sneered. They were ugly with
protruding foreheads, giant ears, and pointed teeth (in their first
appearance their image on the screen was enlarged to amplify their
ugliness). They took visible pleasure in being dishonest and
dishonorable and were usually on a mission of theft or treachery (an
exception is discussed below). What sets them apart from the humans,
klingons, romulans, cardasians, and borg? They care about money. A rare
exception was a ferengi scientist who was obsessed with getting credit
for his discovery. He was described as very unusual for his race and was
killed early in the episode.
Another illustration of the new Star Trek's attitude toward money is an
episode dealing with terrorists. The crew was evacuated from the
Enterprise while it was docked for a maintenance procedure. The captain
returned briefly and encountered robbers stealing the ship's atomic fuel.
At first he deliberately avoids killing and explains that this is his
morality. Later he kills them without remorse. What changed? He
learned that the robbers were planning to sell the atomic fuel for money.
This justified killing them.
The spin off series Deep Space Nine is just as bad. A ferengi is in
charge of the space station's casino and bar. Again and again his
dishonesty and greed endanger everyone. A plague is spread when he uses
the only functional food equipment on the station to get refreshments for
his customers. He arranges an auction of artifacts one of which almost
destroys the station. He cheats some alien gamblers at the casino and
the game they play in retaliation uses humans as pieces. The embedded
message is clear; all money making is cheating, all money makers are
cheats.
.c.Paranoia
The search for patterns unavoidably entails the risk of seeing patterns
that are not there. Here are some patterns that might or might not be
real.
Suspecting evil motives in the absence of evidence is paranoid but it is
unreasonable to expect direct evidence of evil government plans and
governments often have evil and deceitful plans.
Assault weapon ban.These "assault
Military engagements are the only
the best choice. If a government
a civilian population it would be
beforehand.
weapons" are just military weapons.
situation in which military weapons are
were planning military actions against
wise to confiscate military weapons
Humans not allowed in environmentally sensitive areas.According to some
environmental agendas, large areas of land in the USA are to be off
limits to humans; even to low flying aircraft. These would be good
locations for concentration camps or other secret facilities since
civilians would never be allowed near them.
Space aliens.Throughout history governments have reduced opposition by
directing attention to external enemies even if they had to create them.
The appearance of space aliens would greatly reduce opposition to a world
government. Anyone planning to implement a world government would
therefore have a motive to fabricate evidence for space aliens.
The apocalypse.Fundamentalist Christians strongly oppose world government
but many believe that modern events correspond to biblical prophesy.
These believers won't interfere with developments that appear to be God's
will. Anyone planning to implement a world government could therefore
reduce opposition from fundamentalists by incorporating elements of
biblical prophesy.
.c.Libertarianism From the Heart
Who are these Libertarians anyway, and what do they believe? They are
perhaps more easily understood in terms of what they don't believe; they
don't believe in government nearly as much as other political
persuasions. Nearly all libertarians would agree that the government we
have now is at least ten times too big; most would agree that it is at
least 100 times too big; and a significant minority feel that it is 1000
or more times too big. They tend to argue among themselves about how
much government is really optimum for society but the amount under
discussion is always a tiny fraction of what we are used to. They
believe that most, if not all, of the services performed by governments
at all levels can be either eliminated or performed more fairly and
efficiently by private enterprise, churches, charity, or other voluntary
means.
Although the Libertarian Party is only the tip of the iceberg of the
libertarian movement, party literature is representative of the ideology
and is generally accessible to nonlibertarians. Most libertarian
literature, party and otherwise, tends to focus on one of two
perspectives. The first is economic efficiency, where it is shown again
and again how government policies have aggravated the problems they were
meant to solve, whereas non-government alternatives have been more
effective and fairer. The second is the perspective of rights,
especially property rights and civil rights. It is repeatedly shown how
government policies can (and must) violate rights of all types even while
claiming to protect them.
There is nothing wrong with these arguments; they are deeply felt and
well supported by facts. I sense however, that they lack some critical
ingredient, that they miss some crucial perspective. These arguments do
not speak to the heart, and so they do not speak to liberals. In the
following essay I am attempting to fill this gap.
Most political activism has some roots in the desire to do good, to
benefit our fellow humans, the warm glow that comes from feeling that
something you are doing contributes to human happiness. Who among us
would not see the sick healed, the ignorant educated, the hungry fed?
Most feel that sickness, ignorance, and hunger are basic evils and would
like to help rid the world of them. Libertarians feel the same way but
they strongly disagree with the methods commonly used on these problems.
Consider for example, the process of supporting a government solution to
healing the sick. It seems unjust that the poor should suffer because
they can't afford doctors, so you support government funded health care
of some sort. It seems like a simple and direct approach, but although
you mean well, you're creating some harmful and destructive dynamics for
all involved--yourself included.
The money spent to heal the sick is first collected as taxes. That means
people are forced to pay. So you are supporting the use of force to take
people's money from them and spend it as you see fit. Is this just?
Would you feel it was just that someone should take what is yours and use
it as they see fit? This is what you are doing to others. It doesn't
matter what the program is; however sure you are of its merits you're
only a human being with human judgment. You are imposing your decisions
on someone else's life without their agreement. There has never been any
government program that everyone agreed with.
Stop and consider. Is this how you want to relate to your fellow humans?
Is this the path of personal growth? You act as dictator over those who
disagree with you whenever you support a government program. Instead of
looking at this in terms of right vs. wrong, I only ask that you look
within yourself and see how it makes you feel.
Staying with this example of healing the sick through government
programs, let's look at another harmful dynamic created by this well
intended act. Consider the doctors; when their services are funded by
the state they are employees of the state and naturally owe their first
allegiance to it. Shouldn't they owe that to their patients?
Can a government health care agency be flexible enough to support
innovative or radical therapies (keeping in mind that this is taxpayer's
money)? Can new forms of healing compete effectively with a "free"
service of conventional medicine, even though they may in fact be
cheaper? Can the doctors whose livelihood depends on the continuation of
the system be expected to be impartial in their evaluation of it? Can the
administrators whose careers depend on the growth of the system be
expected to accept the growth of alternatives? Isn't it to the best
interests of all the participants to support the system even at the
expense of the patient's health?
Lastly let's consider the patients. It is from empathy with their
suffering that government programs receive their support. It is an
almost universal human trait to value things on the basis of their cost
and to be wasteful of things that are cheap or free. When electricity is
cheap we waste electricity. When water is free we waste water. If
medical care were free it would be wasted also. If drugs were free,
wouldn't you take more? If back rubs were free, wouldn't you get one
every few days?
Think of the people you know personally. Most have health, family,
friends, church affiliations, insurance, or money. The few that lack all
these are probably similar in number to those who would slip through any
government net of health care.
Consider also how low the cost of health care could become if there were
no restrictions on how it was done or who did it. Good medical care is
administered by veterinarians for about a tenth the comparable cost for
humans. The opportunity to select exactly the style and amount of
medical care you could afford would also reduce costs.
Imagine how much food would cost and how little choice we would have it
all had to be prescribed by highly trained nutritionists. Think how much
would be wasted if it were free. Is this what we want for medical care?
So far I have only shown the harm of government solutions. Where does
that leave you with your desire to do good? If government programs don't
work, then what does? Consider giving directly. Most charities are much
more efficient than the government at delivering goods and services to
the needy. By giving directly, you can exactly target your donation to
the most worthy cause you see.
Do you feel your contribution isn't enough? Contribute more. Do you feel
others should contribute more? Spend time soliciting and collecting their
contributions. Do you feel others should be forced to contribute whether
they want to or not? Examine this feeling carefully and decide for
yourself if it is compatible with your desire to be good to your fellow
humans.
These arguments on healing the sick are merely a single example of the
general patterns of thought and feeling characteristic of libertarianism.
The same approach is just as sound when applied to the problems of
feeding the hungry, educating the ignorant, building roads, regulating
business, protecting the consumer, restricting trade, fixing prices and
wages, prohibiting the purchase of certain goods and services,
prohibiting the use of certain weapons and chemicals, etc. In each of
these cases, when you support a legal system which forces people to
behave as you like, you cast yourself in the role of tyrant over others
who find themselves cast in the role of subjects.
Is your own life so free of errors, so well run, so ideal compared to the
lives of those around you that it's right for you to force your values
and decisions on them? Do you really believe you're that much smarter
than everyone else?
.c.Communicating Libertarianism
Speech delivered at the 1984 Libertarian Party of Florida Convention
David Bergland said "When people know what we stand for we have won."
This is what's happening today with the Libertarian Party. We're telling
people what we stand for, a communication process, one on one. The
previous speakers have talked about politicizing the masses and this is a
very important part of libertarianism. However, we should also seek
people who are already active in other camps, who are idealists. We
cannot offer much to the power seekers because we don't have any power
to hand out. But we have something for idealists. We have an ideology
for them that is more coherent, more powerful, and more spirited than the
ideologies they have now.
A quote from Louis Brandeis:"The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in
insidious encroachments by men of zeal. Well meaning but without
understanding."
These people are all around us. They are full of zeal, they are well
meaning, but they are without understanding. We must acknowledge that
well meaningness, we must acknowledge that zeal. We must begin by
recognizing that these people are trying to do good, and not immediately
tell them how wrong they are.
I believe people who are opposed to us should still know about us. One
local paper, the St. Petersburg times, is very hostile to
libertarianism. During the Clark campaign the only coverage they gave
was "Libertarian presidential candidate Ed Clark wants to legalize hand
guns and narcotics." That was their total coverage. I was glad they
published it; I would rather hear a hundred people speak against us
saying things that are true than hear one person speak in favor of us
saying things that are not true.
Let me tell you the story of Larry Holden. He is touring the country and
plans to run for president in the year 2000 with the Human Party. He is
full of compassion, full of caring, full of new age mysticism, he
believes that we have to have a new mind, and he is 100% sincere.
He drives around the country in a used car with a total budget of $7000
and his media success is spectacular. He walks into a newspaper office
and they publish an article with photograph on him, he walks into a radio
station and they grant him a big interview. Why? Because he comes from
the heart. Because he is full of spirit. Because he is a totally
sincere in trying to communicate what he really believes.
I listened and found out his basic ideas then I asked him, "Have you ever
heard of libertarianism?". He said he read some libertarian literature
and he didn't really find anything in it he objected to but the
libertarians he had met were empty of spirit, they had no heart, they
were all intellectuals. So he didn't become a libertarian. He could be
one of us today.
Now I will talk about communication techniques, and remember, techniques
for communication are like techniques for sex; they won't help at all if
you're not alert, sensitive, and responsive. You are dealing with a
particular individual human being and they are dealing with you as a
particular individual human being. I cannot too strongly stress this.
Sales techniques are good but the first technique is to listen, to pay
attention.
Maslow said when your only tool is a hammer, everything looks like a
nail. If the only thing you know how to do is argue ideological
principles, every conversation is going to be an ideological argument.
That's okay if you are talking to somebody else who likes it, if not, you
will make no progress at all.
I'm going to call on us to spend a few moments in introspection
exercises. They won't all touch everyone but I'm hoping to try to get
everyone loosened up a bit with some emotional calisthenics.
First thing I would like us to experience is loneliness. Look around
you. See us in this room, we're the biggest gathering of libertarians
in the state.
Think of how many millions of people there are in the
state of Florida and how many dozens of people there are in this room.
Ponder that for a minute. We're looking at ourselves as a big live wire
movement but we are a very tiny minority. A frighteningly tiny minority
when you consider the strength of the state. I think it's optimistic to
say that one percent of the population really knows what libertarianism
is about and is willing to get out there and vote and support us, like
the activists in the Democratic and Republican camps. Robespierre once
said "The defenders of liberty will be but outlaws so long as a horde of
knaves shall rule." I think we have a horde of knaves ruling, and under
those circumstances I think we can be described as outlaws.
The next thing I want to deal with is fear of oppression. I think this
is the motivation for many of us. We're trying to start society moving
in our direction and if we fail, which may very well happen, ten years
from now we may not be able to meet in a room like this. Ten years from
now we may have to be dispersed, letting only a few friends know we are
libertarians.
We should all be aware that we ride a razor edge and if
things fall our way well and good. If they don't we would best be
prepared to go into hiding. The fact that we are here, and our names are
known as libertarians may some day wreak havoc with our individual lives.
This is a chance we have all taken and a chance we should remain aware
of.
I'd like to move us into another state, a state of humility. This is
unique to libertarians because the Democrats and the Republicans and the
populists and the fascists and most of the other groups believe they know
what's best for everybody. We're unique, we believe that everybody knows
what's best for themselves. This is our unique humility, this is
something the other movements lack. It is this ability to say "I don't
know what color you should paint your car. All I know is that you are
the person who should decide what color to paint your car." Most of the
other movements are out there arguing over the right colors and telling
people what color to paint their cars. We're not saying what you should
do. We're saying you're the one to decide what you should do, and this
makes us unique.
assets.
Remember this uniqueness, it is one of our greatest
There's a problem I've observed among libertarians. It traces back to
Ayn Rand and I can only call it "fear of altruism". Perhaps this is
heresy but I believe there is nothing wrong with wanting to make the
world a better place to live. Just because other people do it with bad
effects doesn't mean that it's something that we should not do. It's
natural and normal to want your fellow human beings to be happy and
healthy, and to devote your own time and energy toward that end. This is
not something to avoid. Just because altruists wreak havoc doesn't mean
that we should avoid altruism.
Which moves close to another feeling that I would like us to consider,
exhilaration. This is an adrenaline rush. Whenever you get involved in
political power, it's exciting. That's like being in a football game.
You can feel it raise your heart rate when politics gets going, when you
really get into a discussion with someone. There's nothing wrong with
this but beware, it's a drug. I don't have anything against drugs but
be careful of this one, because it doesn't discriminate between good and
evil causes. It's something that also thrills our opponents. This is
what the Nazis felt. The more we are aware of it in ourselves the more
we can be aware of it in others. The more empathy we feel with others
the better we can understand them, the better we can communicate with
them. By knowing of this feeling, by being aware of this exhilaration,
by feeling this rush that people get from the challenge and the combat of
politics, only thus will we become able to communicate with and perhaps
convince those who mistake excitement for a guide to constructive action.
I'd like to tell a little story. Years ago, in Davenport Iowa, I was
visiting a woman who was going to a political dinner, I came along for
the companionship and the food. I got my food and sat and talked to the
people around me at the table. This was my first exposure to either
democratic or republican politics as they were practiced on the
grassroots level. The air was thick with a feeling of great conspiracy,
like we were about to pull off some incredible crime. When the speaker
got up I was absolutely appalled and horrified. He said "This is what we
have to do in order to get power. Once we've got power then we'll be
able to make everybody do what we want and won't that be great!". That
was the whole message. It was all tactics and techniques for getting
power so they could make everybody do what they wanted. That gave me a
bad taste for the whole process which I'm still getting over. There's
nothing wrong with power as long as you don't exercise it.
Enough of the introspection. That may be a little more exercise than
most of you were ready for but I wanted to start out with that just to
get you loosened up and feeling that this speech is also a one on one
process.
Now we will move on to empathy, a crucial part of communications.
Unless you can see things the way someone else sees them, you will find
it impossible to communicate the way you see things to them. I had a
fortunate experience these last few years of being involved in a course
in aikido. This is a harmonious and peaceful martial art, although that
may be hard to imagine. One of the first principles of aikido is to
never meet force with force, never. When someone attacks you pivot,
turn, move yourself sideways alongside them so you can steer the energy
of the attack. Don't oppose it, steer it. You can only steer if you're
facing in the same direction. You can only control something you're
moving with. You can't control things you oppose. The same is true in
dealing with people. If someone comes at you with an argument, a hostile
argument like an attack, if you meet that attack directly you'll do
nothing but butt heads. No one will come away with any changes. If
instead you can pivot and find something in that attack with which you
sincerely agree you will gain the capability of steering that argument in
the direction you want. You control a two ton automobile at 70 miles per
hour by moving the wheel with one finger. It's because you're not
opposing, all of the force you're exerting is steering. When someone
comes at you with an argument don't try to stop it. Try to find
something in it to agree with so you can try to steer that argument in
the direction you want. Part of this process of course, is listening to
feelings. Don't just listen with your ears, listen with your heart.
When people talk to you it's because they care. It's because there's
something they want to communicate. Find out what it is. Find out what
they care about. You'll only find that out by listening to them. The
first step for getting someone to pay attention to what you say is to pay
attention to what they say. If you do it in a half-hearted or insincere
manner then all you're going to get back is half-hearted or insincere
attention. It's a difficult process, a process many of us are not used
to, and yet something we should cultivate.
Many people relate to the political process with a parent child model.
If you listen to how someone relates to government and politics you will
find a lot of people behaving as if they are a good or bad child to the
parent government. This is something we grow up with. We learn at a
very early age to deal with our parents and I think that is a model for
the way we deal with authority the rest of our lives. Some of us are
fortunate enough to have libertarian parents. Others have had very
authoritarian parents whom they really loved and they follow authority
the rest of their lives while others really hate it and rebel against
authority the rest of their lives. Whether you follow it or whether you
rebel against it, you may be controlled by it, because you can be
controlled by what you rebel against just as you can be controlled by
what you agree with. I think we can learn a great deal from the spread
of early Christianity. The Christians were very apolitical. They would
rarely be trapped into making direct statements for or against the
government. It was strictly "give onto Caesar that which is Caesar's".
There was a lot of politics going on back then and Christ's advice was
"be wise as serpents and harmless as doves". Good advice for us too. Be
wise as serpents and harmless as doves. Because if we threaten people,
they're going to come back and stomp us, there's a lot more of them than
there is of us. We threaten nobody. The other side of the coin in these
parent child relationships is the person who says "Well we have to take
care of the poor, don't we?". This is a statement like "I have to take
care of my children, don't I?".
It's the same relationship. You're not going to change that
relationship, the best you can do is try to convince someone that they
aren't really the child of the government, they aren't really parent to
the poor. The problems come from this parent child relationship with
the government or the people. You'll never change the way people relate
to their parents or children but you can try to change the subject of
those relationships.
Another story. I learned something from arguing with a very bright lady
who was concerned about the oil companies buying up the solar cell
industry. She was convinced that they were conspiring to withhold
photovoltaics from market until the oil ran out. We talked about this
and I finally realized that she couldn't envision the kind of
bloodthirsty competition that actually takes place in industry. If
you've been in small communities, small groups, and families and you've
always been around cooperative people, the cut throat competition in
industry is difficult to imagine. It is much easier to imagine the oil
company presidents getting together and saying "All right, we're not
going to develop solar cells until the oil runs out." than it is to
imagine the fears of each oil company president thinking "If I don't get
these things out first and the other company does, I'm dead in the
water."
Competition in industry is like war without violence. While
many within an industry may become personal friends, the relationships
between corporations are made of distrust and malevolence.
Now I want to move on to some specific emotions you will encounter in
others. Remember the principle of aikido, find areas of agreement. Once
you have agreement you can start steering. As long as you remain in a
state of disagreement, all you will do is butt heads.
First I want to touch on something so common you can get almost anybody
started on it, fear of war. A lot of people out there are very afraid of
war and this is appropriate. We had this TV show, "The Day After" we
have the nuclear freeze movement, not to be confused with the nuclear
winter, we have lots of media activity on fear of war. We can exploit
this because we have a great deal to say about war. We have real
strategies to reduce the likelihood of war. Talk about signing a no
first strike agreement. Talk about pulling out of NATO. Talk about
ending the draft and bringing overseas troops back home. Don't shift the
subject. If somebody is afraid of war, that's good, we're afraid of war
too. We even have a plan that offers some hope. This is what I mean by
steering. If somebody is afraid of war, don't fight that, use it.
Closely related is fear of crime. This usually translates into fear of
violence. I think we have a great deal to say to this too. Yes, the
streets are dangerous. Yes, you have to lock your car. Yes, you have to
beware of burglars in your home. These are scary times we live in. Talk
to them about some of the things that can help. You might consider going
armed. You might consider encouraging other people to go armed so it
would be scary for the criminals too. Consider diverting police
resources away from victimless crimes toward crimes of violence. When
you have some agreement, lead the conversation to other topics and look
for other points of agreement.
One of the things working against us is fear of anarchy. As soon as
someone gets a fairly clear idea of what libertarianism means this fear
of anarchy comes up pretty often. "Oh my God, what are we going to do?
People are going to riot in the streets!" and so on and so forth. What
people actually fear when they talk about anarchy is actually fear of
violence or theft. Libertarians are strongest of all against violence
and theft. So if someone starts talking about anarchy, ask "What are you
really afraid is going to happen?" Ask for a description, try to make it
concrete. Once it becomes concrete it will be much easier to show that
we're really on their side. We share that fear. We don't want people
looting and rioting in the streets either. There's no disagreement
there. So you're not really in opposition to someone who comes out with
that kind of a fear of anarchy although you may want to move away from
the term "anarchy". I believe that we will see a lot more riots and
looting under the administrations of Democrats and Republicans than we
would under Libertarians. While I'm at it I would like to point out that
of all of the ideologies available to the voter, ours is the most
explicitly nonviolent. Unlike the others, we don't believe in violent
means no matter how good the ends. Any association we have with violence
is completely undeserved and it is up to us to change it.
Fear of poverty is also common. I think most of us have experienced it
at one time or another. Those who haven't, I'm sure will. I've been
there so long I'm getting used to it. We can say quite a bit to this.
We can show how the government destroys the prosperity of the country and
causes poverty. People are poorer because they pay taxes. Mention all
the government roadblocks to making money; licensing, minimum wage, red
tape, all that stuff.
My step son, Denny, took a course in
horticultural technology and got a good job with a landscaping company.
He was getting ready to leave town so he quit, but his leaving town was
delayed, so for the last few weeks he's been mowing lawns. He came up to
me the other day and said "You know, I've been making more money mowing
lawns than I got working for the landscaping company." This brings me to
our amazing underground economy. May I suggest that we begin calling it
the "informal economy". This is more descriptive and up beat. Every
success of the informal economy is an argument for the adaptability of
laissez faire capitalism, and successes surround us. Marijuana may now
be the second largest cash crop in the United States, next to corn.
Drugs passed tourism years ago as the biggest business in Florida.
Estimates of the size of the informal economy range from ten to twenty
five percent. Visit a flea market and you will meet hundreds of shoppers
and merchants who may or may not obey the law but who generally have no
use for it.
Moving along, we come to discouragement. There are a lot of people out
there into discouragement. Nothing seems to help. Nothing the
government does seems to really cure the problems. Nobody has the
answers. Remember what I said about humility? We don't have the answers
either. All we have is the idea that people should be free to find and
implement their own answers. So we agree that nobody has all the
answers, everyone has their own answers. We need an opportunity to
implement those answers. I have a slogan "If you want the Democrats or
Republicans to run your life, then vote for them. If you want to run
your own life, vote Libertarian." Communicate this to people in
discouragement. We don't really care so much what is chosen as who does
the choosing. The key factor is who makes the decisions, not how they
turn out.
Now we come back to something I covered earlier, fear of oppression.
Sometimes you will wind up talking to someone about libertarianism who is
into social systems. My approach to them is that libertarians do not
oppose any voluntary social experiments. If a bunch of socialists want
to get together and they want to set up their socialist community, as
long as none of them are prevented from escaping, libertarians will never
stand in their way. This means that we can relate to fear of oppression
in people who want to do social experiments. We can say "We will not
stop you in your social experiments as long as they're voluntary. As
long as the people involved are not forced to participate, we're not
going to interfere. We're not going to stop you from propagating your
ideas". They have more chance to bloom and flourish under libertarianism
than any other system because nobody but libertarians can tolerate such
diversity. Of course as libertarians we all believe they are doomed to
dismal failure, but they don't know that, and they certainly don't want
to hear it from us. They will learn only by experiment, and the more
they can experiment, the faster they will learn.
Although you may not see it as an emotion, I'm going to talk about the
feeling of fairness. We've had a lot of discussion of rights and closely
related to rights is justice. Rights and justice are very hard terms
with hard definitions. Fairness is a feeling. Instead of talking about
someone's rights, ask "Does this feel fair to you?". Don't say people
have an inalienable right to property, say "Do you feel it's fair to take
away what someone has earned?".
You're saying the same thing except now
someone can look within themselves and respond, "Well no, I guess that's
not fair." Now you've got some agreement. If you start talking about
property rights, someone's going to try definition matching, "Do I
believe in rights? What is just? What is right?" A process all taking
place in the head. Appeal to people's fairness. That's different, that
comes from the heart. People will agree that something is or is not fair
much sooner than they will agree that it is or is not right, or just,
because they own the feeling of fairness. If you say "I think this is
right." you have to look in some book to see if you're correct or not.
Fairness comes from the heart, and everyone has their own feeling of
what's fair.
Now we come to what I honestly believe is the most powerful emotion that
we can use, it will eventually wind up fueling us better than anything
else. It's love. Here is another slogan, an example of love in the form
of compassion; "Peaceful honest people don't belong in jail." It's short
enough to remember and hard to dispute, yet I think it is pure
libertarianism. It creates the image of peaceful honest people sitting
in jail. Good image, great image for people to ponder. "Gee, am I
really supporting that? Am I in favor of that?"
I talk to liberals about the poor, and what I find is compassion for the
victims. I got into a fine talk once about wage and price controls and
they were sorry for the poor farmers. I said supports drive up food
prices. The poor spend the largest part of their income on food.
There's a lot more poor people than farmers. Shift your victims. Don't
think of the farmers as victims, there's only a few of them. Look at all
those poor people out there paying more for food. Think about their
status as victims, have some compassion for them too. Point out how
horribly oppressed the poor are by the actions of government. Encourage
people to have compassion, encourage them to express love. Say things
like "Should everyone have to pay for things that only a few people
enjoy?" That doesn't seem fair does it?
One of the commonest expressions of love is the desire to help. People
want to make the world a better place to live. Remember fear of
altruism, this is what we shouldn't avoid, this wanting to make the world
a better place to live. We want to make the world a better place to live
too. There's nothing that liberals can claim on that stand that we
cannot. We can point out that government presently does a lot of harm.
Real human lives are hurt by people who want to help. They're not bad,
just mistaken. Just needing a little one on one communication.
One of the things that I've been learning to communicate is the
importance of directness in helping. If you want to help the poor, help
the poor. Give them your money. If you feel that what you're giving
isn't enough, give more. If you feel that other people should give more,
give your time in soliciting and distributing their contributions. If
you feel that other people should be forced to give more whether they
want to or not, reconsider your perspective and decide if forcibly
imposing your value system on others is really helping them.
I'm going to quit now and go to questions, but first a little poem.
SUBVERSIVE SATURDAY
A flea market is a happy place, a little like a fair.There's smiling
faces all around, and freedom in the air.I stroll the aisles of anarchy
and mingle with the crowd,The shoppers and the merchants, telling tales
and laughing loud.I buy a trinket for a dime, the man says "Penny tax."I
smile and say "Someday we'll get those bastards off our backs."He looks
up, startled, as I drop a penny in his hand.The sparkle in his eye shows
me he starts to understand.He grins and says "You bet your ass!" and
cheers me on my way.The sun is bright, my tread is light, subversive
Saturday.The experts tell of gloom and doom and danger all aroundBut our
economy is strong and healthy, underground.
Question:When I Say, "Is it fair to pay for something you don't use?"
people come back and say "Is it fair to use something you don't pay for?"
Response:Look for agreement, say "No, and this is the unfairness of the
system." You have to participate in unfairness in order to live. You
can't get from one place to another without driving on the roads that
others have been forced to pay for. Two years ago I was at Fort DeSoto
Park at a fourth of July party. I got into a fine talk with someone
there. I said I don't like to go to Fort DeSoto Park, I don't like to go
to any public park, because I feel that people who can't be here are
forced to subsidize my leisure. It detracts from my enjoyment because I
am oppressing people just by being here. That's the best response I know
to that line of argument. It's not fair and I hate to use things that I
haven't paid for. That is one unfairness of the system, that it is very
difficult to avoid oppressing others.
are trying to change.
That's one of many unfairnesses we
.c.Seattle Story
This is a chronicle of the 1987 Libertarian Party National Convention in
Seattle, Washington from within the Russel Means campaign for the
presidential nomination.
I spent the first week in September in Seattle at the Libertarian Party
National convention. Perhaps we made history. Long before the
convention it was clear that nothing like it had ever happened before to
the LP. Both major contenders for the presidential nomination were far
better known than any from previous years yet they couldn't have been
more different.
First came Ron Paul, ex-republican congressman from Texas. A politician
through and through who published a financial newsletter advocating free
markets and received the highest rating ever by the National Taxpayer's
Union. He wrote a blistering letter of resignation to the republican
party and came to the Libertarians seeking to be our presidential
candidate. He had the support of the LP establishment and promised to
raise enough money to get us on the ballot in every state and buy enough
TV ads so people would know who we were. Never had anyone who held such
office come to us seeking to be our candidate. He had money, power, and
agreed with everything on the party platform except abortion (Paul is
pro-life, the platform isn't).
Then came Russell Means. It is impossible for me to conceal that he was
my favorite although I promised to fully support whoever won the
nomination. He is best remembered for the 1973 occupation of Wounded
Knee where he and a small band of followers held off federal agents for a
couple of months. He had been around the globe attending international
conferences and meeting with various leaders. He had been beat up, shot,
stabbed, strafed, and bombed fighting for freedom. He had lots of
charisma, lots of media appeal, and agreed with the entire party
platform.
There was also Jim Lewis, a constitutional lawyer who was our vicepresidential candidate in 1984. His main emphasis was fighting the IRS.
He may go to jail soon. There was also Harry Glenn, a true country boy
with a bushy white beard and a home grown libertarian attitude who came
2,000 miles in a broken down car to run for president. He felt he would
be the best candidate since there's a lot more bars than libraries and
everybody listens to country music. As in any Libertarian Party election
anywhere there was NOTA (none of the above).
The convention was in the Sheraton in the middle of downtown Seattle. I
set up my trusty Macintosh (it traveled in two very heavy suitcases of
checked baggage) in the room used for Russell Means headquarters. The
first couple of nights I shared a hotel a few blocks away with a couple
of other Florida libertarians. After that I was able to find places to
crash in the Sheraton.
My intent from the start was to bury myself behind the scenes and be part
of the machinery making Russell Means the next presidential candidate.
Due to the restrictions on airline travel I arrived a few days early
however and indulged in breakfast in the Space Needle. It's not as
complex or expensive a building as it appears. I think Tampa Bay should
have one just like it.
From the beginning the Means team had a different atmosphere than you
would expect from campaigners at a convention. On the traditional night
of wild partying in the respective hospitality suites the two cases of
beer in the bathtub at the Means suite went largely unconsumed. Apples,
on the other hand, were everywhere. The Ron Paul supporters generally
had short hair and neckties, the Russell Means supporters looked like
they came by bus.
We were terribly disorganized and underfunded compared to the Ron Paul
team but remained dedicated, cheerful, and optimistic right up to the
vote on Saturday morning, September 5. Ron Paul got 51% to win on the
first ballot, Russell Means got over 30%, Jim Lewis, Harry Glenn, and
NOTA got the rest. The next ten or twenty minutes were pandemonium with
balloons popping, signs waving, and all four hundred or so of us laughing
or crying from triumph or despair.
As calm gradually emerged from chaos the next order of business
choose a vice-presidential candidate. Andre Marrou from Alaska
only serious contender. He had announced very early and seemed
unchallenged. Someone nominated Russell Means, although we all
wouldn't take it. During the nominating speech Russell himself
and took the podium.
was to
was the
knew he
walked in
The room exploded with cheering and applause that continued longer than
any I have ever heard anywhere. Most of those present had just voted
against him but they were all on their feet yelling and clapping until he
waved for them to stop. I had not imagined that such unity and
enthusiasm could ever come from such a collection of hard core
individualists. He declined with good spirit, explaining that he knew
Andre to be a freedom fighter and we should all support him. He
explained that vice-president wasn't the office he was seeking and
besides, he'd already done that with Larry Flynt. The only other
contender for vice-president withdrew so Andre Marrou won it by a voice
vote.
Later the Means team met in the hospitality suite. I had never imagined
that a group of people who had just been defeated, some at considerable
personal cost, could turn around so quickly. The only explanation was
that although it appeared to be a goal oriented effort (to elect Russell
Means as candidate) in fact it was process oriented (to reach the rest of
society with libertarianism). Russell had plans of his own to run for
the state legislature in Arizona as a Libertarian Party candidate and
seek the presidential nomination again in 1991. He also has a project
underway to establish a free nation on an Indian reservation in North
America. Russell Means is still part of the Libertarian Party and is
likely to remain so. (In all my years as a vocal libertarian I have yet
to encounter a single genuine ex-libertarian, although I have met any
number of ex-activists.)
We formed a new organization named FIFE, the acronym of "freedom is for
everyone". The image of a fife is associated with the American
Revolution and a fife is also an American Indian instrument. Naming the
organization after a musical instrument emphasizes the process of
nonthreatening communication so central to our aim. Our newsletter will
be called "The Sound of the FIFE".
At the convention there were a lot of buttons with no words but only a
picture of a feather. We chose this as a symbol of freedom to propagate
libertarianism outward and downward. Suppose the wearing of a feather
comes to express a belief that freedom is for everyone, a belief that we
all need more freedom and less government, a belief that it's time to
lighten up, a belief that government should touch our lives as lightly as
a feather.
Feathers are free. Feathers are all different. Anyone can wear one,
from the corporate executive to the drunken city panhandler; from the
glittery rock star to the migrant laborer. Anyone can be a libertarian.
The aim of FIFE is not just to reach those people who don't read books
but those who can't read books, not just to reach the non-intellectuals
but also anti-intellectuals, not just to reach all segments of society
but also those outside society. FIFE exists to reach the people the Ron
Paul for President campaign will miss.
It will be an exiting election year. The republican and democratic
candidates are so dull that Ron Paul should draw good media attention.
His resources should enable us to be on the ballot in all fifty states.
There are enough radical elements in the platform to draw media attention
away from the abortion issue and anyway Ron Paul has promised to
distinguish between his personal viewpoint and the party platform. It's
funny to think that the Republican and Democratic platforms are hardly an
issue even within the parties yet the Libertarian platform is central to
us and defines us. I have some concern that through Ron Paul's candidacy
we may be labeled as ultra-conservative but it is easier to correct false
ideas than to speak in a total vacuum.
.c.Birth of Fife
This is a chronicle of the 1987 Libertarian Party National Convention in
Seattle, Washington from within the Russel Means campaign for the
presidential nomination.
We on the Means team all felt shock and dismay on the morning of
Saturday, September 5,1987 when Ron Paul won the Libertarian Party
presidential nomination on the first ballot. Many of us had wagered much
and lost much pursuing a dream of the libertarian message carried to the
oppressed throughout the USA and even the world. But wait, from such
defeats do even greater victories spring.
The first sign that the defeat was not as it appeared came quickly. To
no one's surprise Russell was nominated for vice president although we
all knew he would decline. During the nominating speech he came from the
back of the hall and took the podium. He declined the nomination and
praised Andre Marrou, the only other viable vice presidential nominee, as
a good libertarian and freedom fighter. He spoke of his love and
gratitude for all the wonderful people he met in the Libertarian Party.
He spoke to 400 hard core libertarians heart to heart.
When he finished the hall exploded with cheering and applause that
continued longer and louder than any I can remember. Less than a third
of these folks had voted for Russell yet they all stood cheering and
applauding for what seemed like forever. How could this be? What did it
mean?
What it meant to me was that even the people who voted against him
regarded Russell as a hero, a freedom fighter, a good libertarian, and an
asset to the party. It communicated love and respect. Russell felt it
and began to smile. He later said that he had never felt such love from
a crowd since he got out of prison, and that crowd was Indian. Ron Paul
felt it too. He later jokingly asked the audience why Russell always got
more applause than he did.
Soon many of us were in the hospitality suite with Russell and the mood
was very odd. The despair and defeat were still present but there was a
peculiar feeling of enthusiasm. We didn't have to form a group because
we already were a group, we only needed a name. We didn't have to create
a goal because we already had a goal, spreading the word that freedom is
for everyone.
There were some revealing comments made. Someone quipped "Well, now they
have their candidate and we have our hero". Everyone laughed. Someone
asked us to talk Russell into staying in the party. They were told
Russell was talking us into staying in the party. Everyone laughed
again. We began to identify a lot of talents, skills, and resources.
What to do next? We found a name in the campaign slogan "Freedom is for
Everyone". The acronym FIFE suggests the American revolution. The fife
is also an Indian instrument. Naming our group after a musical
instrument emphasized nonthreatening communication. A vivid image, and
easy acronym, it felt right. The newsletter name followed easily "The
Sound of the Fife".
Ben Olsen and his feather buttons prompted us to adopt the feather as our
symbol. Russell liked that since it was part of his mother's name. I
liked it most of all, the feather as a symbol of libertarianism is truly
inspired.
.c.Why Fife?
Why FIFE? What is the reason for such an organization to exist?
Most people are libertarians at heart. FIFE can introduce them gently to
libertarianism without the hard political edge of the Libertarian Party.
FIFE can act as a clearinghouse organization for libertarian groups of
all kinds. The "Sound of the FIFE" newsletter can publish ads for and
articles about many different libertarian groups thus showing the
diversity within the libertarian movement. Freedom socials hosted by
local FIFE representatives can distribute literature from various
organizations.
Few people are now or will soon be hard core libertarians. Many people
already believe that the path to a better world is generally the path of
less government. FIFE can reach out to these people the hand of
friendship. The Libertarian Party is rightly seen as hard core, far
removed from "mainstream" society. Unless the LP changes a great deal,
which is unlikely, this creates a niche. This is the organization for
people who like the ideas of the libertarians but think the Libertarian
Party is too extreme. People who feel this way can wear a feather and
come to FIFE meetings expecting to find some agreement.
Many hard core libertarians are never seen by the Libertarian Party
because they have no belief in politics. FIFE is beyond politics, it is
culture. People who despise all things political can wear a feather and
go to FIFE meetings expecting to find some agreement.
People who just want to be left alone can wear a feather.
Ideas for activities:
I have been holding Libertarian Party meetings at my home for over a year
now on the 8th of every month at 8:00 pm. Just recently I changed the
name to "Freedom Social" and now consider the event to be cosponsored by
LP and FIFE. The loose party atmosphere is intended to encourage lots of
individual conversations. People generally like to eat and drink and
talk. If the regulars bring drinks and snacks and others can be
convinced to contribute to a kitty it need not be expensive. I try to
have as much literature out as there is room for. I take contributions
but the literature is generally free; it's better off in the hands of
someone who wants to read it than going back in the box. Literature from
all different groups is available to best match the interests of the
partiers. The hardest part is encouraging the emergence of leadership
from chaos. The less leadership is present (or at least visible) the
quicker new leaders will emerge. There have been successes with this
method but the results are generally disappointing.
I have written elsewhere (Vision of a feather) about the ideology of
wearing a feather, what are the mechanics? Start with yourself wearing a
feather. Someone asks why. What you say and what you do may be the main
propagation tool of FIFE. Suppose you say the feather stands for freedom
and give them a business card. The light blue card has the same logo as
the t-shirts: "Freedom is for Everyone. Russell Means" and a picture of
a feather. At the bottom is the national phone number for FIFE. Local
organizations could put their own stuff on the backs of the cards such as
some nonthreatening libertarian saying and a phone number of a local
contact. The cards could be printed in large numbers by the main office
and distributed nationally to get lower printing costs and better
appearance.
Just as we have different reasons for wearing feathers, we have different
answers when people ask us why.
Think of a little leaflet explaining FIFE as a loose organization of
people who believe in freedom. The leaflet has a feather and a tiny
safety pin attached inside. If the reader believes in freedom, please
wear the feather. If not, pass the leaflet on to a friend. It also
mentions the monthly freedom socials.
The issue has been raised concerning the deliberate killing of birds for
their feathers. The feathers in the leaflets should of course all be
shed naturally. Otherwise this is a task for group spirit rather than
rules. As long as the spirit of nonviolence is strong in us this will
never be a problem. Feathers are easy to collect in large numbers for
free.
I would like to see the background color behind the feather be
The sky is a natural place for a feather. It suggests looking
color of the Libertarian Party is (generally) dark blue. FIFE
the same message with more light, let us choose the same color
light. Sky blue is also the only color "invisible" to copying
sky blue.
up. The
carries
with more
machines.
.c.You Can't Buy News
I wrote this for Russel Means in '87 and Dick Boddie also used it in '91.
In 1980 we spent about four million dollars and got about one million
votes. In 1984 we spent about one million dollars and got a little over
a quarter million votes, the same number of votes per dollar each time.
But even our million votes in 1980 were invisible to the press. There
was no coverage on election night, no coverage after election night. We
were ignored and forgotten. LaRouche is still more remembered than Ed
Clark or David Bergland. I believe that even if another candidate of the
same mold raises twelve million dollars and gets three million votes we
will be forgotten the next day, just as we were in 1980. It doesn't have
to be like that. Libertarianism can be remembered. Libertarianism can
be news. We can ensure that the vast majority of Americans learn about
Libertarianism in 1988, but we will never do it with a cookie cutter
politician for a candidate - even if we spend several times as much money
as we did in 1980.
Russell Means has already gotten three times the media coverage of his
nearest competitor on only a tenth as much money because he is news and
gets media attention free. Through Russell Means Libertarianism can be
news and Libertarianism can get media attention - and public awareness beyond our fondest hopes. Ed Clark said "When people know what we stand
for we have won." This is a unique opportunity to reach more people with
our message than we ever imagined possible.
Russell arrived at the Seattle Sheraton and the press was there with
their cameras and microphones. Why? Not because he spent money. How
much money does it take to get the press to come out to interview a
politician? It doesn't work like that. The only way to buy media is to
buy commercials. Nobody can buy television talk shows or magazine
covers. They pick what they think will appeal to their customers,
whatever is interesting, whatever is news. It can be Libertarianism.
How much money would it take to get a Libertarian Party candidate on the
cover of Newsweek or Time? How much money would it take to get a
Libertarian Party candidate on the Oprah Winfrey show? Forget it! Money
can only buy advertisements in magazines or on television. Are we news
to be covered or are we commercials to be ignored? Russell Means will be
news, other candidates can only buy commercials. Which do you want us to
be?
.c.Why Wear a Feather?
Although I no longer wear a feather I still think that the ideas
expressed here have merit and I would like to see them carried on in some
form.
I wear a feather as a symbol of freedom. Freedom that brings harmony,
abundance, and love. It is the freedom we all have when we give it to
others, like love. It is the freedom of those who have outgrown the
desire for control over others but who instead delight in the diversity
of humankind.
To be free we learn not to be threatened by the desires of people with
different goals. The converse is also true. We also learn not to
threaten others, even indirectly, to achieve our goals. This is what it
means to wear a feather. Fear me not. I have no desire to control you.
If you have no desire to control me, wear a feather so I can recognize
you as a friend.
We will have harmony as soon as we stop trying to control each other. We
will have abundance as soon as we stop robbing each other. If you don't
want to control, if you don't want to rob, wear a feather.
If you just want the government to leave you alone wear a feather. If
you believe that the path to a better world is the path of less
government wear a feather. If you like what the libertarians are saying
but the Libertarian Party is too political wear a feather. If you don't
care about politics but think people everywhere should be free wear a
feather.
When you see someone else wearing a feather you will know each other to
be potential friends. You already have a shared belief in freedom
although everything else about you may be different. That shared belief
lets you communicate freely and agreeably. It also makes it easy to
start conversations with strangers and encourages strangers to start
conversations with you. The act of wearing a feather is an invitation to
those around you to ask why. This asking why may well be their first
introduction to the idea of freedom. This one-on-one contact can
shortcut the usual growth process of organizations. It is especially
helpful if you have a card or something with some information and a local
phone number for more. You may even carry a spare feather for giving
away.
.c.Libertarian Paradoxy
Complex objects become clearer when seen from different angles.
libertarianism from pairs of opposing viewpoints.
Here is
Libertarians are a serious threat to the establishment.
Because we seek to undermine the very foundations of political power we
threaten the establishment not with mere change but with annihilation.
Politics is a power game where the winners impose their plan on the
people. Whoever wins, the game continues. But when the libertarians win
the game is over. Nobody imposes their plan on the people. The immense
power and wealth of the churches is based on faith. If Sunday comes and
nobody goes to church the game is over. Less obviously government is
also based on faith. If people stop believing in it the game is over.
Libertarians are working toward that day.
Libertarians are no threat to the establishment.
Libertarians are completely nonviolent and do not seek to seize anyone's
wealth. A libertarian take over will protect wealth from seizure and
businesses from interference.
Libertarians are very peaceful.
The libertarian party is absolutely committed to peaceful means of
political and social change. It is written into the platform and the
pledge. No other political organization requires its members to sign a
pledge of nonviolence. This pledge insures that no violent political act
will ever be approved by the libertarian party.
Libertarians are very violent.
The libertarian founding fathers of this country fought a bloody
revolutionary war against oppressive British rule. Libertarians today
believe strongly in the right of the people to be heavily armed and to
defend themselves with lethal force against government tyranny.
Libertarianism is simple.
Just as cold is the absence of heat, liberty is the absence of tyranny.
Where others have complex plans to run your life the libertarians let you
live your own plan. Governments have shelves of books of laws you must
obey but libertarianism can be learned in one lesson. What could be
simpler than leaving people alone?
Libertarianism is complicated.
The market dynamics that evolve in the absence of regulation are far more
complex than the regulations could ever be. The state can make a law
that all who enter stores must wear shoes. Libertarians would let the
myriad merchants each make their own policy to fit their separate needs.
Price fixing always fails because real prices come from thousands of
judgments by millions of people. Regulations could never approach this
complexity.
Libertarianism is obvious.
Most Americans are libertarians, they just don't know it yet. What could
be more obvious than the incompetence of the government? Songs and jokes
chronicle our contempt for our leaders every day. It is abundantly clear
to most Americans that the government is far too large; this is the
message of the libertarians.
Libertarianism is obscure.
Who are the libertarians? Ask a hundred people on the street and perhaps
five will have heard the word and two will know what it means. Since
there is no plan, there is no plan to grasp, to like or dislike. No one
who has, or hopes for, political power has any reason to spread the word.
The media get a lot of news and entertainment from the politicians and
have nothing to gain by alienating them. Without the support of rulers
or media the libertarian message is easily obscured.
Libertarians are kind.
Only the libertarians will accept your right to pursue your dreams. Only
if you dream of oppressing others will you be opposed and then it will be
mainly by your empowered victims instead of a dominant authority. Only
the libertarians will allow the poor to build their wealth and climb the
ladder of success without legal impediment. Only the libertarians will
allow the desperately ill access to any person, procedure, or medicine
that they wish to pursue. Only the libertarians will allow the dreamers
of other forms of society to pursue their plans and build their
(voluntary) social systems. Many are inspired to libertarianiam by
sympathy for the millions who have suffered and died at the hands of
governments through the ages.
Libertarians are cruel.
A libertarian administration would let the hungry starve, the sick
perish, and the poor remain poor. It would allow mistreatment of animals
and destruction of the environment. It would allow people to waste their
lives with drugs, gambling, prostitution, and other vices still
unimagined.
Libertarians are a cult.
Libertarians have their own special beliefs and jargon wildly at odds
with prevailing cultural norms. Libertarian Party members must sign an
oath when they join. They believe they are a global revolutionary
movement with the force of morality behind it. They attract the young
and impressionable by advocating the deregulation of sex, drugs, and rock
& roll.
Those infected with libertarianism rarely return to
conventional political beliefs. Many libertarians are heavily armed and
believe the government is their enemy.
Libertarians are not a cult.
Libertarian organizations have no strong leaders and no secret agendas.
Their ideology is drawn from dozens of unrelated sources throughout
history. Completely independent libertarian organizations work together
without conflict. They are proud of the diversity of personalities and
lifestyles within the movement. They are firmly and adamantly
nonviolent. They believe they represent the mainstream, that most
Americans are libertarians who just don't know it yet.
Libertarians have great faith in humanity.
Libertarians believe that people are so good that they don't need to be
controlled by a government. They believe laws to compel people to be
good are unnecessary. The common people with their common wisdom will
handle their lives better than any laws could tell them they must.
Libertarians have little faith in humanity.
Libertarians believe people are too evil to be trusted with the power of
government. They believe people will oppress and tyrannize each other if
the tools are in their hands. Even wise and kind people usually do more
harm than good using the violent power of government.
Libertarians are sure to fail.
The media and the educational system have convinced the people that a
strong government is good, or at least necessary. Opposition forces,
including the libertarians, are infiltrated, disorganized, and obscured
by a media blackout. All political struggle is portrayed as personality
conflicts between rulers thus avoiding examination of principles or
trends. Laws soon to be passed will suppress any resistance to unlimited
increases in government. Liberty is doomed when people accept tyranny.
Libertarians are sure to succeed.
Big government can't survive unless the people believe in it. The Soviet
system collapsed in spite of its overwhelming power when the people
stopped believing in it. In an information age the principles and trends
of government failure will become impossible to conceal. Tyranny is
doomed when people seek liberty.
.c.Appendix A - Suggested Readings from the Libertarian Party, U.S.A.
(*) indicates introductory non-fiction works
Introductory Politics
Frederic Bastiat, The Law (*)
David Bergland, Libertarianism in One Lesson (*)
David Bergland, America's Libertarian Heritage (*)
Maurice Cranston, What Are Human Rights? (*)
Ganet Garrett, The People's Pottage (*)
F. A. Hayek, The Road to Serfdom (*)
Rose Wilder Lane, The Discovery of Freedom (*)
H. L. Mencken, A Mencken Chrestomathy (*)
P. J. O'Rourke, A Parliament of Whores (*)
C. Northcote Peterson, The Law and the Profits (*)
Isabel B. Paterson, God of the Machine (*)
Ayn Rand, Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal (*)
Leonard Read, Anything That's PeacefuI(*)
Robert Ringer, Restoring the American Dream (*)
Murray Rothbard, For a New Liberty (*)
Classics of Political Thought Before the 20th Century
Lord Acton, Essays on Freedom & Power
Benjamin Constant, The Liberty of the Ancients
Compared with that of the Moderns
Auberon Herbert, The Right & Wrong of Compulsion by the State
Wilhelm von Humboldt, The Limits of State Action
Thomas Jefferson, Declaration of Independence (*)
John Locke, Two Treatises of Government
John Stuart Mill, On Liberty (*)
John Milton, Areopagitica
Tom Paine, The Rights of Man
Herbert Spencer, Social Statics
Herbert Spencer, Man vs. the State (*)
Lysander Spooner, No Treason
Henry David Thoreau, Civil Disobedience (*)
20th-Century Classics of Political Thought
Isaiah Berlin, Four Essays on Liberty
James M. Buchanan & Gordon Tullock, The Calculus of Consent
F. A. Hayek, The Constitution of Liberty
Ludwig von Mises, Liberalism
Albert Jay Nock, Our Enemy the State (*)
Michael Novak, The Spirit of Democratic Capitalism (*)
Robert Nozick, Anarchy, State, & Utopia
Karl R. Popper, The Open Society & Its Enemies
Murray N. Rothbard, The Ethics of Liberty
Economics, Economic History & Economic Policy
D. T. Armentano, Antitrust Policy: The Case for Repeal
Frederic Bastiat, Economic Sophisms (*)
P. T. Bauer, Dissent on Development
James Bovard, The Farm Fiasco
Milton Friedman, Free to Choose (*)
Milton Friedman, Capitalism and Freedom
F. A. Hayek, Ed., Capitalism & the Historians
Henry Hazlitt, Economics in One Leseon (*)
George W. Hilton, Federal Transit Subsidies
George W. Hilton, Amtrak
Gabriel Kolko, The Triumph of Conservatism
Ludwig von Mises, Human Action
Ludwig von Mises, Planning for Freedom (*)
Llewellyn Rockwell, Ed., The Free Market Reader (*)
Llewellyn Rockwell, Ed., Economics of Liberty (*)
Murray Rothbard, Man, Economy & State
Murray Rothbard, Power & Market
Murray Rothbard, What Has Government Done to Our Money? (*)
Adam Smith, The Wealth of Nations
Michael A. Walker, Ed., Rent Control: A Popular Paradox
Privatization
Randall Fitzgerald, When Government Goes Private
Robert W. Poole Jr., Cutting Back City Hall (*)
History of Economic Thought
Alejandro A. Chafuen, Christians for Freedom:
Late Scholastic Economics
Israel Kirzner, The Economic Point of View
Tod G. Buchholz, New Ideas from Dead Economists (*)
Why Marxism & Socialism Are Wrong
M. M. Bober, Karl Marx's Interpretation of History
David Conway, A Farewell to Marx (*)
Lesek Kolakowski, Main Currents of Marxism
Tibor R. Machan, Ed., The Main Debate
Ludwig von Mises, Theory and History
Karl R. Popper, The Poverty of Historicism
J. L. Talmon, The Origins of Totalitarian Democracy
J. L. Talmon, Political Messianism
Robert C. Tucker, The Marxian Revolutionary Idea
Robert C. Tucker, Philosophy & Myth in Karl Marx
What's Wrong with Socialist Economics
Eugen von Bohm-Bawerk, Karl Marx and the Close of His System
Henry Hazlitt, Time Will Run Back (*)
Trygve Hoff, Economic Calculation in the Soclialist Society
Ludwig von Mises, Socialism
Paul Craig Roberts & Matthew A. Stephenson, Marx's Theory of
Exchange, Alienation & Crisis
Foreign Trade
Jagdish Bhagwati, Protectionism
James Bovard, The Fair Trade Fraud
Henry George, Protection or Free Trade
Joan Kennedy Taylor, Ed., Free Trade: The Necessary Foundation
for World Peace (*)
Foreign Policy and National Defense
Steven E. Ambrose, Rise to Gobalsm: American Foreign Policy
Since 1938 (*)
James Bamford, The Puzzle Palace
Ted Galen Carpenter, Ed., America Entangled: The Persian Gulf Crisis
& its Consequences
Theodore Draper, A Very Thin Line: The Iran Contra Affairs
Fred Kaplan, The Wizards of Armageddon
Jonathan Kwitny, Endless Enemies
Seymour Melman, The Permanent War Economy
Jonn Prados, Presidents' Secret Wars
America and American History
Bernard Bailyn, The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution
Robert A. Caro, The Power Broker: Robert Moses
& the Fall of New York
Robert A. Caro, The Years of Lyndon Johnson
Arthur A. Ekrich Jr., The Decline of American Liberalism (*)
Paul Fussell, Wartime
Robert Higgs, Crisis & Leviathan
Murray N. Rothbard, Conceived in Liberty
Thomas Sowell, Ethnic America
Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America
Perspectives on the World and People
Paul Johnson, Modern Times: The World from the Twenties
to the Nineties (*)
Francis Kendall & Leon Louw, After Apartheid: The Solution
for South Africa
Thomas Gale Moore, Privatization Now or Else
Walter Williams, South Africa's War Against Capitalism
Social Policy
Walter Block, Defending the Undefendable (*)
Clint Bolick, Unfinished Business: A Civil Rights Strategy for
America's Third Century
Clint Bolick, Changing Course: Civil Rights at the Crossroads
Henry Hazlitt, The Conquest of Poverty (*)
Michael Levin, Feminism & Freedom
Wendy McElroy, Ed., Freedom, Feminism & the State
Charles Murray, Losing Ground: American Social Policy, 1950-1980
Charles Murray, In Pursuit of Happiness & Good Government
Ellen Frankel Paul, Equity & Gender: The Comparable Worth Debate
Joseph Peden & Fred Glahe, Eds., The American Family & the State
Helmut Schoeck, Envy
Julian L. Simon, The Ultimate Resource
Julian L. Simon, The Economic Consequences of Immigration
Thomas Sowell, Civil Rights: Rhetoric or Reality?
Thomas Sowell, The Economics of Race
William Graham Sumner, What Social Classes Owe to Each Other (*)
William Tucker, The Excluded Americans: Homelessness &
Housing Policies
Gordon Tullock, Wefare for the Well-To-Do (*)
Walter Williams, The Sate Against Blacks (*)
S. David Young, The Rule of Experts: Occupational Licensing
in America
Drug Policy
David Boaz, Ed., The Crisis in Drug Prohibition (*)
Ronald Hamowy, Ed., Dealing wIth Drugs
Melvin B Krauss & Edward R Lazear, Eds., Searching for Alternatives
Thomas S. Szasz, Ceremonial Chemistry
Steven Wisotsky, Beyond the War on Drugs
Education
John E. Chubb & Terry M. Moe, Politics, Markets & American Schools
Myron Lieberman, Beyond Public Education
Health Care
John C. Goodman, Twenty Myths About National Health Insurance (*)
Ronald Hamowy, Canadian Medicine
Sam Pelzman, Regulation of Pharmaceutical Innovation
Land Use & The Human Environment
Terry Anderson & Donald R. Leal, Free Market Environmentalism (*)
Walter Block, Ed., Economics & the Environment: A Reconciliation
Bemard Siegan, Land Use Without Zoning
Richard L. Stroup & John Baden, Natural Resources
Law and Legal History
Clint Bolick, Grass-Roots Tyranny
David Bumham, A Law Unto Itself: Power, Politics & the IRS
Jonathan Emord, Freedom, Technology, & the First Amendment
Richard A. Epstein, Takings: Private Property & the Power
of Eminent Domain
Richard A. Epstein, A Theory of Strict Liability
Richard A. Epstein, Forbidden Grounds: The Case Against
Employment Discrimination Laws
Henry Mark Holzer, Sweet Land of Liberty (*)
Harry Kalven, Jr., A Worthy Tradition: Freedom of Speech in America
Stephen Macedo, The New Right Versus the Constitution
Felix Morley, Freedom & Federalism
Roger Pilon, Ed., Flag-Burning, DIscrimination & the
Right to Do Wrong: Two Debates
Lysander Spooner, An Essay on the Trial by Jury
Ralph K. Winter, Jr. & John R. Bolton, Campaign Finance &
Political Freedom
Religion
Walter Block, The U. S. Bishops & their Critics
Walter Block & Irving Hexham, Eds., Religion, Economics, &
Social Thought
Walter Block, Geoffrey Brennan, & Kenneth Elzinga, Eds.,
Morality of the Market
Walter Block & Donald E. Shaw, Eds., Theology, Third World
Development & EconomIc Justice
Leonard W. Levy, The Establishment Clause: Religion and
the First Amendment
Ronald Nash, Poverty and Wealth: The Christian Debate
over Capitalism (*)
Ed Nelson & James Singleton, Lessons from Louisville
Michael Novak, Free Persons & the Common Good
Right to Bear Arms
Stephen P. HaIbrook, That Every Man Be Armed
Stephen P. HaIbrook, A Right to Bear Arms
Don B. Kates Jr., Ed., Restricting Handguns (*)
Don B. Kates Jr., Ed., Firearms & Violence
Gary Kleck, Point Blank: Guns & Violence in America
Social Change
Timothy Garton Ash, The Uses of Adversity: Essays on the
Fate of Central Europe
Richard Ashcraft, Revolutionary Politics & Locke's
Two Treatises of Government
Eric Foner, Free Soil, Free Labor, Free Men
Norman Gash, Politics in the Age of Peel
Joseph Hamburger, James Mill & the Art of Revolution
Aileen S. Kraditor, Means & Ends in American Abolitionism
Pauline Maier, From Resistance to Revolution
John Morley, On Compromise
Robert V. Remini, Martin van Burin & the Making of
the Democratic Party
Peter Stansky, Gladstone: A Progress in Politics
Classic Fiction & Drama
Charlotte Bronte, Shirley
Elizabeth Gaskell, North & South
Heinrich von Kleist, Michael Kohlaas
Alessandro Manzoni, The Betrothed
William Shakespeare, Richard II
Sophocles, Antgone
Stendhal, The Red & the Black
Contemporary Fiction
Cameron Hawley, Cash McHall
Cameron Hawley, Executive Suite
Ken Kesey, One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest
Ken Kesey, Sometimes a Great Notion
Jonathan Lynn & Anthony Jay, Eds., The Complete Yes, Minister
Jonathan Lynn & Anthony Jay, Eds., The Complete Yes, Prime Minister
Ayn Rand, The Fountainhead
Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
Nevil Shute, On the Beach
Nevil Shute, Round the Bend
Nevil Shute, A Town Like Alice
Leonard Wibberley, The Mouse That Roared
Science Fiction
Robert Heinlein, The Moon is a Harsh Mistress
James Hogan, Mirror Maze
James Hogan, Voyage from Yesteryear
Ira Levin, This Perfect Day
C.S. Lewis, That Hideous Strength
George Orwell, 1984
Ayn Rand, Anthem
H.F. Saint, Memoirs of an Invisible Man
L. Neil Smith, The Probability Broach
Melinda M. Snodgrass, Circuit
Melinda M. Snodgrass, Circuit Breaker
Melinda M. Snodgrass, Final Circuit
Vemor Vinge, The Peace War
Vemor Vinge, True Names
Children's Literature
Natalie S. Carlson, The Family Under the Bridge
Rebecca Caudill, Tree of Freedom
Paul Galdone, Illus., The Little Red Hen
Donald Hall, Ox-Cart Man
Robert Heinlein, Between Planets
Robert Heinlein, Red Planet
Robert Heinlein, The Rolling Stones
Robert Heinlein, Starman Jones
Madeleine L'Engle, A Wrinkle in lime
Jean Merrill, The Pushcart War
O. T. Nelson, The Girl Who Owned a City
Kate Seredy, The Singing Tree
Dr. Seuss, Yertle the Turtle
Dr. Seuss, The Butter Battle Book
Dr. Seuss, Thidwick the Big-Hearted Moose
Isaac Bashevis Singer, The Fools of CheIm and Their History
T. H. White, The Once & Future King
T. H. White, The Book of Merlyn
Laura Ingalls Wilder, The Little House Stories
.c.Appendix B - ASG list of libertarian oriented organizations
Compiled by Advocates for Self-Government, 1994
ACTON INSTITUTE
161 Ottawa NW, Suite 405K, Grand Rapids, MI 49503
Promotes a contemporary understanding of the classical liberal
philosophy which is the product of the religious traditions of the
West. Publishes books, policy papers, newsletters, and conducts
conferences and seminars. (Fr. Dirico) 616-454-3080
ADAM SMITH INSTITUTE
2 Orchard Street, London SW1P3DQ, England
Educational and research institute. Publishes studies on
privatization and deregulation, and suggests free market policy
applications. 01­222-4995
ADVOCATES FOR SELF-GOVERNMENT
3955 Pleasantdale Rd, Suite 106A, Atlanta, GA 30340
Supports local libertarian outreach with Seminar 1 and Operation
Politically Homeless; publishes Liberator and World's Smallest
Political Quiz. Teaches libertarian communication skills Catalog of
audio tapes, video, books & more. (Carole Ann Rand) 404-417-1304
ATLAS FOUNDATION
4084 University Drive, Suite 103, Fairfax, VA 22030-6813
Expounds principle that economic actions have economic
consequences; helps set up new free market think tanks; publishes
Highlights & Atlas Report (Alex Chafmen) 703-934-6969
CATO INSTITUTE
1000 Mass Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20001-5403
Public policy research foundation; publishes books, monographs,
policy analysis & CATO Journal, all from a market liberal
perspective; sponsors acclaimed week-long summer seminar at
Dartmouth (David Boaz) 202-842-0200
CENTER FOR LIBERTARIAN STUDIES
P.O.Box 4091, Burlington, CA 94011
Holds conferences, seminars & symposia for "scholarly business
people." Publishes Journal of Libertarian Studies. (Burton Blumert)
800-325-7257
CENTER FOR THE STUDY OF MARKET ALTERNATIVES
P.O.Box 15749, Boise, ID 83717
Conducts free market seminars for teachers and the general public,
and debate seminars for high schools. Publishes CSMA Newsletter.
(Allan Dalton) 208-368-7811
CITIZENS FOR A SOUND ECONOMY
1250 H Street NW, Suite 700, Washington, DC 20005
Free-market public-interest advocacy organization; lobbies for
free-market legislation (e.g. Individual Retirement Accounts, free
trade, privatization & deregulation). (Paul Beckner) 202-488-8200
COMPETITIVE ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE
1001 Connecticut Ave, NW Suite 1250, Washington, DC 20036
Explores free-market solutions to environmental problems, antitrust
reform & trade; sponsors Jefferson Group pro-market information
exchange forum. (Fred Smith) 202-331-1010
FOUNDATION FOR ECONOMIC EDUCATION
30 S Broadway, Irvington-on-Hudson, NY 10533
Original libertarian educational foundation, est. 1947. Publishes
Freeman magazine, books; conducts week-long summer seminars;
provides material for high school & college debaters. (Hans
Sennholz) 914-591-7230
FOUNDATION FOR RESEARCH ON ECONOMICS AND THE ENVIRONMENT
502 S. 19th #1, Bozeman, MT 59715
Promotes public policy reform supporting conservation & wise use
of natural resources based on property rights, reliance on market
processes. (John Baden) 406-585-1776 206-548-1776
FRASER INSTITUTE
626 Bute Street, Vancouver, BC Canada V6E3MI
Public policy research institute w/free market orientation;
publishes books & studies on economic effects of government policy.
Center for the study of Economics & Religion division promotes
dialogue between ecclesiastics and economists. 604-688-0221
FREE MARKET FOUNDATION OF SOUTHERN AFRICA
P. O. Box 52713, Saxonwold, South Africa 2173
Promotes privatization, deregulation & the free market; publishes
books & studies; sponsors conferences. (Leon Louw) 642-4407
FREEDOM SCHOOL
4415 W Pacific Coast Hwy, Newport beach, CA 92663
Teaches Bob LeFevere's dynamic Freedom School; Excellent followup to CATO, IHS, or FEE seminars. Conferences in various locations.
(Kevin Cullinane) 714-650-5259
FREEDOM PARTY OF ONTARIO
Box 2214 Station A, London, Ontario, Canada N6A4E3
Publishes Calendar of Individual Freedom (US & Canadian versions
available). Also publishes newsletters and issue papers, and fields
candidates for public office. 519-433-8612
FULLY INFORMED JURY ASSOCIATION
P. O. Box 59, Helmville, MT 59843
Promotes legislation requiring that juries be informed of their right
to consider both law and fact in reaching verdicts. Publishes FIJA
Activist 406-793-5550
FUTURE OF FREEDOM FOUNDATION
11350 Random Hills Rd. #800, Fairfax, VA 22030-6044
Defends free markets, private property, free trade, freedom of
conscience & civil liberties. Produces audio tapes on history,
economics, philosophy & principles of liberty; publishes Freedom
Daily (monthly calendar book). (Jacob G. Hornburger) 703-934-6101
HEARTLAND INSTITUTE
800 East Northwest Hwy Suite 1080, Palatine, IL 60067
Provides privatization and deregulation studies and conferences
aimed at Midwest news editors, news directors, and legislative
aides. (Joseph Bast) 708-202-3060
INDEPENDENCE INSTITUTE
14142 Denver West Pkwy #101, Golden CO 80401
Colorado's public policy center. Endeavors to build consensus on the
truths of the Declaration of Independence and explores their
applicability to political and economic issues at the state level.
(John Andrews) 303-279-6536
INDEPENDENT INSTITUTE
134 98th Ave. Oakland, CA 94603
Public policy institute. Sponsors non-political studies into critical
public issues; publishes books & the Independent ; conducts
conferences. (Jim Christie) 510-632-1366
INSTITUTE FOR HUMANE STUDIES
4400 University Drive, Fairfax, VA 22030-4444
Searches for the best moral argument for a free society, and
discovers, encourages and supports scholars who articulate that
argument. (William Beach) 703-934-6920
INSTITUTE FOR OBJECTIVIST STUDIES
82 Washington ST. Suite 207, Poughkeepsie, NY 12601
Sponsors seminars & lectures to advance Objectivism as basis for
theoretical knowledge, social progress & individual happiness.
Supports research & publishes the IOS Journal. (David Kelly) 914471-6100
INSTITUTE FOR ECONOMIC AFFAIRS
2 Lord North Street, London SW1T3LB, England
Conducts public policy research with a free market orientation;
publishes newsletter, books and video tapes on free-market
subjects. 01-799-3745
INSTITUTE OF POLITICAL ECONOMY
Utah State University, Logan, UT 84322-0725
Research institute. Studies political, philosophical & moral
foundations of a free society. Sponsors conferences, issue papers &
op-eds. (Veronica Ward) 801-750-2064
INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY FOR INDIVIDUAL LIBERTY
1800 Market Street, San Francisco, CA 94120
International libertarian network. Publishes issue papers, Freedom
Network News; sponsors int'l conferences. (Vince Miller) 415-8640952
JAMES MADISON INSTITUTE
P. O. Box 13894, Tallahassee, FL 32317
Researches issues of concern to Florida & other southeastern states.
Emphasizes economic freedom, individual responsibility, limited
gov't. Publishes monographs & newsletter (John Cooper) 904-3863131
KNOWLEDGE PRODUCTS
P. O. Box 305151, Nashville, TN 37230
Produces audio tapes of the words of great thinkers, many with a
freedom orientation (Jefferson, Smith, Thoreau, etc.) (Michael
Hassell) 615-889-6223
LAISSEZ FAIRE BOOKS
938 Howard Street #202, San Francisco, CA 94103
Sells wide selection of libertarian, history, philosophy & Randian
books, audio tapes, videos; informative monthly book catalog. 415541-9780/800-326-0996/fax:415-541-0597
LANDMARK LEGAL FOUNDATION
1006 Grand Avenue 8th Floor, Kansas City, MO 64106
Engages in aggressive litigation to protect and promote a freemarket economy and Constitutional principles. 816-474-6600
LIBERTARIAN FAMILIST MOVEMENT
P.O.Box 4826 El Paso, TX 79914-4826
Family oriented children's rights advocates.
Familist (Bob Krel) 915-755-6940
Publishes Libertarian
LIBERTARIAN PARTY OF CANADA
1 St. John's Rd. Suite 301, Toronto, Ontario, M6P4C7 Canada
Runs candidates for public office; holds an annual convention. 416763-3688
LIBERTARIAN PARTY OF U.S.A.
1528 Pennsylvania Ave. S.E., Washington, DC 20003
Runs candidates for public office; publishes Libertarian Party News;
holds bi-annual convention. 202-543-1988
LIBERTARIANS FOR LIFE
13424 Hathaway Drive, Wheaton, MD 20906
Formed to show why abortion is aggression under general libertarian
principles. Reasoning is expressly philosophical rather than
religious. (Doris Gordon) 301-460-4141
LIBERTARIAN PRESS, INC.
Spring Mills, PA 16875
Sells a limited selection of libertarian and Austrian economic titles.
Book catalog. (412) 458-5861
LIBERTY FUND
8335 Allison Pointe Trail Suite 300, Indianapolis, IN 46250
Encourages study of the ideal society of free and responsible
individuals. Sponsors conferences, publishes books, produces films.
(Dub Hill) 317-842-0880
LIBERTY MAGAZINE
P.O.Box 1181, Port Townsend, WA 98368
Bimonthly review of libertarian & classical liberal thought, culture,
politics. Contributors include Hospers, Hess, Casey, other
libertarian notables. (R.W. Bradford) 206-385-5097
LIBERTYTREE NETWORK
134 98th Ave., Oakland, CA 94063
Mail order supplier of free market books, audio tapes, video tapes,
collectibles and gifts. (David Theroux) 415-632-1366/800-8724866
LINCOLN LEGAL FOUNDATION
100 W. Monroe #1600, Chicago, IL 60603
Public interest law center defends individual liberty, promotes free
markets and works to limit government power through the rule of
law. (Joe Morris) 312-606-0951
LOCAL GOVERNMENT CENTER
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd. Suite #400, Los Angeles, CA 90034
Privatization clearinghouse. Publishes Fiscal Watchdog; maintains
privatization database. (Philip Fixler) 213-392-0443
MACKINAC CENTER
119 Ashman St, PO 568, Midland MI 48640
Analyzes Michigan economic issues from a free market perspective.
Sponsors seminars; publishes commentaries and studies. (Lawrence
Reed) 517-631-0900
MANHATTAN INSTITUTE
52 Vanderbuilt Ave., New York, NY 10017
Promotes free market with books, symposia & Manhattan Report for
scholars, officials & the public. (William Hammet) 212-599-7000
MISES INSTITUTE
Mises Bldg. Auburn University, Auburn, AL 34689-5301
Promotes Mises' principles with seminars, books; publishes The Free
Market and Austrian Economics Newsletter. 205-844-2500
NATIONAL CENTER FOR POLICY ANALYSIS
12655 North Central Expressway, Suite #720, Dallas, TX 752431739
Does policy research on privatization; focus is health care, welfare;
publishes books & monographs. (John Goodman) 214-386-6272
NATIONAL TAXPAYERS UNION
325 Penn. Ave. SE, Washington, DC 20003
Lobbies to reduce taxes; ranks Congressmen/"Spending Score."
Dollars & Sense newsletter. 202-543-1300
PACIFIC LEGAL FOUNDATION
2151 River Plaza Drive Suite 305, Sacramento, CA 95833
Law firm; litigates in support of free enterprise, property rights,
limited gov't. Publishes In Perspective newsletter. (Ron Zumbrum)
916-641-888
PACIFIC RESEARCH INSTITUTE
755 Samsone Street, San Francisco, CA 94111
Publishes studies & books on market solutions to social, economic,
environmental issues. (Sally Pipes) 415-989-0833
PIONEER INSTITUTE
85 Devonshire Street 8th floor, Boston, MA 02109
Commissions in-depth market-oriented studies from scholars on
Massachusetts public policy issues. Runs annual citizen contest on
privatization ideas. (Virginia Straus) 617-723-2277
POLITICAL ECONOMY RESEARCH CENTER
502 S 19th Ave #211, Bozeman, MT 59715
Specializes in natural resource economics, hazardous waste policy,
Native American issues; publishes PERC Reports , books & op-ed
pieces. (Michael Copeland) 406-587-9591
THE PRAGMATIST
P.O.Box 387, Forest Grove, PA 18922
Bimonthly magazine presents practical arguments for
libertarianism. Analyzes issues from a pragmatic standpoint. (Jorge
Amador)
REASON FOUNDATION
3415 Sepulveda Blvd. Suite #400, Los Angeles, CA 90034
Educates public on principles of a free society w/Reason magazine,
op-ed articles, and more. (Robert Poole, Jr.) 310-391-2245
RENAISSANCE BOOK SERVICE
P.O.Box 2451 Riverside, CA 92516
Offers wide selection of free market books; selection in German,
Spanish & French; catalog available. (Gene Berkman) 909-369-8843
REPUBLICAN LIBERTY CAUCUS
1717 Apalachee Pkwy Suite 434, Tallahassee, FL 32301
Works to move Republican party toward greater support for
libertarian ideals through education & outreach efforts. Supports
libertarian-minded candidates for office. Publishes Republican
Liberty (Eric Rittberg) 904-878-4464
SERVICES GROUP
1815 N Lynn St. #200, Arlington, VA 22209
Consults on liberalization of economic policies, esp. free trade
zones, private provision of public services. (Mark Frazier) 703-5287444
TAX FOUNDATION
1250 H Street, NW Suite 750,
Affiliated with Citizens for
tank which has monitored tax
and local gov't since 1937.
Washington, DC 20005-3908
a Sound Economy. Non-partisan think
& fiscal activities of federal, state,
Publishes Tax Features; coined idea of
"tax freedom day." (Dan Witt ) 202-783-2760
THE VOLUNTARYIST
P.O.Box 1275, Grambling, SC 29348
Bimonthly publication explores non-political strategies for
achieving liberty. (Carl Watner)
WRI FILMS, WORLD RESEARCH INC.
P.O.Box 935 San Diego, CA 92169
Produces liberty-based educational films on economics, inflation,
social justice, poverty, etc. (Dan Loeffler) 619-456-5278
.c.Appendix C - Atlas list of libertarian and free market organizations
List of libertarian and free market oriented organizations from the
Atlas Foundation, March 1995.
Marcelo Castro Corbat
Instituto Argentino de Inversion
Florida 141, piso 3
Buenos Aires 1005, ARGENTINA
Phone: 54-1-342-6538/7135/7204/7302
Fax: 54-1-331-5420
Marcos Victorica
institute de EstuCias Contemporaneos
Av. del Libertador 774, piso 5, depto. J
Buenos Aires 1001, ARGENTINA
Phone: 54-1-22-1727
Fax: 54-1-313-6432
Roberto Helguera
Instituto de Estudios Economicos y
de Etica Social, ARGENTINA
Phone: 54-1-312-0251
Fax: 54-1-326-8442
Oscar Cornblit
Instituto de Estudios sobre Teoria
Social y Politicas Publicas Aplicadas
Cerrito 1290, piso 14
Buenos Aires 1010, ARGENTINA
Phone: 54-1-394-3182/3172/3161
Fax: 54-1-111-1885/394-3182
Alvaro Luis Alsogaray
Instituto de la Economia Social de Mercado
Riobamba 1236, piso 7B
Buenos Aires 1116, ARGENTINA
Phone: 54-1-42-7165/7450
Fax: 54-1-42-7165
Carlos Rodriguez
Centro de Estudios Macroeconomicos
de Argentina
Virrey del Pino 3210
Buenos Aires 1426, ARGENTINA
Phone: 552-3291/9313/7771
Fax: 552-7484
Guillermo Arteta
Centro de Estudios para
Politicas Publicas Aplicadas
Av Pte Julio A Roca 620, piso 11
Buenos Aires 1067, ARGENTINA
Phone: 54-1-342-2930/3172/1826
Fax: 54-1-34-2483
Alberto Benegas Lynch
Centro de Estudios Sobre la Libertad
Paseo Colon 823, piso 11, cuerpo B
Buenos Aires 1063, ARGENTINA
Phone: 54-1-362-3266
Hector Siracusano
Centro de Investigaciones Ludwig von mises
Av del Libertador 774, Second Floor
1001 Capital Federal, ARGENTINA
Phone: 815-0319
Fax: 815-0319
Carlos Sanchez Sanudo
Escuela de Educacion Economica y
Filosofia de la Libertad
Hipolito Yrigoyen 710, piso 3
Buenos Aires 1086, ARGENTINA
Phone: 54-1-331-7713 ext. 239
Alberto Benegas Lynch Jr
Escuela Superior de Economia y
Administracion de Empresas
Uriarte 2472
Buenos Aires 1425, ARGENTINA
Phone: 54-1-773-5825/3735
Daniel Pereyra
Fundacion Alberdi
Paseo Sarmiento 169, 6th Floor
Mendoza 5500, ARGENTINA
Phone: 54-61-259554
Fax: 54-61-49-3745
Martin Krause
Fundacion America
CC 32, 1642 San Isidro
Buenos Aires 1426, ARGENTINA
Phone: 54-1-743-2864
Fax: 54-1-743-2864
Ricardo Zinn
Fundacion Carlos Pellegrini
Rivadavia 413 piso 10
Buenos Aires 1002, ARGENTINA
Phone: 54-1-343-4833
Fax: 54-1-331-4699
Luisa Zorraquin de De Marcos
Fundacion Concordia
Av de Mayo 701 piso 17
Buenos Aires 1084, ARGENTINA
Phone: 54-1-334-9125/3318/3395/352 92
Fax: 334-9125 (manual)
Gerardo Bongiovanni
Fundacion del Orden Social de la Libertad
Sarmiento 756 piso 1
Rosario, Santa Fe 2000, ARGENTINA
Phone: 54-41-256561/256341
Fax: 54-41-248022
Severo Caceres Cano
Fundacion del Tucuman, ARGENTINA
Phone: 3111-53/2121-53
Alejandro Zaia
Fundacion para el Progreso en Libertad
Av Belgrano 570, piso 2
Buenos Aires, ARGENTINA
Phone: 54-1-331-7460/6315
Fax: 54-1-311-4199
Ponciano Vivanco
Fundacion Republica para una Nueva Generacion
Lavalle 437, piso 3 C
1047 Buenos Aires, ARGENTINA
Phone: 54-1-322-9461
Fax: 54-1-322-9461
Greg Lindsay
Centre for Independent Studies
PO Box 92
St Leonard's NSW 2065, AUSTRALIA
Phone: 61-2-438-4377
Fax: 61-2-439-7310
John Hyde
Institute of Public Affairs
128-36 Jolimont Road
Jolimont, Vic 3002, AUSTRALIA
Phone: 03-654-7499
Fax: 03-650-7627
Albert Zlabinger
Carl Menger Institute
Montigasse la/3
Vienna A-1170 Austria, AUSTRIA
Phone: 43-1-462-176
Fax: 43-1-450-3326
Violet Esfakis
Foundation for Economic Freedom - Bahamas
PO Box N-3248
Nassau, BAHAMAS
Phone: 809-325-2015
Fax: 809-325-8040
Nizam Ahmad
Making Our Economy Right
1 Outer Circular Road (Municipal No 238)
Bara Maghbazar
Dhaka 1217, BANGLADESH
Phone: 880-2-414876
Fax: 880-2-813-065
Sharif Anzal Hossain
National Economic Forum
c/o Trade World Ltd, Shahnawaz Bhaban,
2nd Fl, Ste 4
9-C Motijheel
Dhaka, BANGLADESH
Phone: 880-2-246704/256834
Fax: 880-2-863957/863357
Oleg Manaev
Independent Institute for
Economic & Political Studies
PO Box 329
Minsk 220101, BELARUS
Phone: 172-20-49-93/20-79-95
Fax: 172-52-32-10/20-49-93
Paul Belien
Centre for the New Europe
Roularta Media Building
Research Park, De Haak
B-1731 Zellik, BELGIUM
Phone: 32-2-467-5730
Fax: 32-3-467-5605
Guy Plunier
Tocqueville Foundation
1 Avenue Armand Huysmans
Brussels B-1050, BELGIUM
Phone: 32-2-648-9618
Jose Luis Veles Ocampo
Camara Departamental de Industria y Comercio
Suarez de Figueroa 127, pisos 3 y 4
Santa Cruz, BOLIVIA
Phone: 591-3-33-4578/4555
Fax: 591-3-33-4-2353
Jose Luiz Velez Ocampo
Fundacion Libertad, Democracia y Desarrollo
Suarez de Figueroa 127, piso 2
Santa Cruz, BOLIVIA
Phone: 591-3-33-4555
Fax: 591-3-34-2853
Armando Marica Valdez
FUNDEMOS
Av 20 de Octubre 2038, piso 4
La Paz, BOLIVIA
Phone: 591-2-370316/358672
Fax: 591-2-391253/358672 manual
Thomaz Magalhaes
Instituto Atlantico
Rua San Jose, 90 - Gr 1310 - Centro
Rio de Janeiro, CEP 20013-900, BRAZIL
Phone: 21-232-1412
Fax: 21-232-1412
Roy Ashton
Instituto de Estudos Empresariais
Rua Dona Laura, 228 - Conj 501
CEP 90430-090
Porto Alegre, RS, BRAZIL
Phone: 51-335-1588/331-2567
Fax: 51-335-1588
Instituto Liberal - Porto Alegre
Porto Alegre - RS CEP 90040-180, BRAZIL
Phone: 51-332-2376
Fax: 51-332-2376
Donald Stewart
Instituto Liberal - Rio de Janeiro
Rua Professor Alfredo Gomes 28
CEP 22251-080
Rio de Janeiro Botafogo, BRAZIL
Phone: 55-21-286-7775/226-6864
Fax: 55-21-246-2397
Darlan Chama
Instituto Liberal de Brasilia
Centro Empresarial Brasilia
SRTVS quadra 701-Bloco A, sala 303
70340-000 Brasilia, DF, BRAZIL
Phone: 55-61-314-1037
Alvaro Pedreira de Cerqueira
Instituto Liberal de Minas Gerais
Av. Bernardo Monteiro 1563, 4o Andar
CEP 30150-281
Belo Horizonte, MG, BRAZIL
Phone: 55-31-273-7058
Fax: 55-31-237-7800
Instituto Liberal do Bahia
Rua Carlos Gomes, 1063/sala 301
Aflitos CEP 40060-410
Salvador, BA, BRAZIL
Phone: 55-71-321-3144
Fax: 55-71-321-8944
F. Fernando Fontana
Instituto Liberal do Parana
Av Senador Souza Naves, 535 - Sala 2
CEP 80050-040
Curitiba, PR, BRAZIL
Phone: 55-41-362-1556
Instituto Liberal do Pernambuco
Caixa Postal 198
CEP 50001-970
Recife, PE, BRAZIL
Phone: 55-81-224-7148
Fax: 55-81-224-8047
Nino Feoli Anele
Instituto Liberal do Rio Grande do Sul
Rua Santa Teresinha, 59
CEP 90040-180
Porto Alegre, RS, BRAZIL
Phone: 55-51-332-2376
Fax: 55-512-28-0958
Fernando Ulhoa Levy
Institute Liberal do Sao Paulo
Av Brasil, 1837
Jardin America, CEP 01431-001
Sao Paulo, BRAZIL
Phone: 55-11-282-9175/280-6170
Fax: 55-11-64-2419
J 0 Meira Penna
Sociedade Tocqueville
"Castalia" SMPW
Quadra 15/6/7
Brasilia DF 71701-790, BRAZIL
Phone: 553-1930
Mira Drakova
Free Initiative Foundation
Ploshtad Slaveykov 4A, Second Floor
Sofia 1000, BULGARIA
Phone: 359-2-80-03-67
Fax: 359-2-80-03-67
Roger Phillips
Association of Saskatchewan Taxpayers
200 1315 Scarth Street
Regina Saskatchewan S4R 2E7, CANADA
Phone: 306-352-7199
Fax: 306-352-7203
Michael Walker
Fraser Institute
626 Bute Street, Second Floor
Vancouver BC V6E 3Ml, CANADA
Phone: 604-688-0221
Fax: 604-688-8539
Troy Lanigan
Gateway Institute
1207 Douglas Street, #604
Victoria BC V8W 2E7, CANADA
Stephen Paine
John Locke Institute of Canada
Post Office Box 1238
St. Catherines, ONT L2R 7A7, CANADA
Phone: 416-684-1657
Fax: 416-356-3635
David Somerville
National Citizens Coalition
100 Adelaide Street West
Toronto ONT M5H lS3, CANADA
Phone: 416-869-3838
Fax: 416-869-1891
Northern Foundation
Box 115 Station B
Ottawa ONT KlP 6C3, CANADA
Phone: 613-563-2548
Fax: 613-563-2548
Sid Parkinson
St. Lawrence Institute
PO Box 307
NDG Station
Montreal, Quebec c H4A 3P6, CANADA
Arturo Fontaine
Centro de Estudios Publicos
Monsenor Sotero Sanz 175
Santiago, CHILE
Phone: 56-2-231-5324/5325
Fax: 56-2-231-0853 manual
Cristian Larroulet
Instituto Libertad y Desarrollo
San Crescente 551
Santiago, CHILE
Phone: 56-2-234-1898/1899
Fax: 56-2-234-1893
Miguel Santamaria Davila, COLOMBIA
Phone: 2450504
Beatriz Elvira Pachon de De Guzman
Centro Latinoamericano para la Privatizacion
Carrera 18, No 88-17, Oficina 403
Santa Fe de Bogota DC, COLOMBIA
Phone: 257-9454
Fax: 611-0362
Alfonso Esguerra Fajardo
Instituto de Ciencia Politica
Carrera 19, No 84-30, piso 2
Apartado Aereo 253 458
Santafe de Bogota, COLOMBIA
Phone: 57-1-257-1202
Fax: 57-1-218-9852
Jorge Enrique Wahanik
Instituto Fes de Liderazgo
Carrera 12, No 70-98
Santafe de Bogota DC, COLOMBIA
Phone: 2492217/2488365
Juan Alfredo Pinto Saavedra
Promocion de la Pequena
Empresa Latinoamericana
Transversal 18 No 101-70
Bogota, COLOMBIA
Phone: 257-4363
Fax: 218-7328
Larry Stewart
Asociacion Nacional de Fomento Economico
Post Office Box 3577
San Jose 1000, COSTA RICA
Phone: 506-534-460
Fax: 506-534-497
Alberto Di Mare
Universidad Autonoma de Centro America
Avenida 2a Calle 17, No 1711
San Jose 7637, COSTA RICA
Phone: 23-5822
Michal Semin
Civic Institute
Vysehradska 49
128 00 Praha 2, CZECH REPUBLIC
Phone: 42-2-29-87-91
Fax: 42-2-29-87-91
Jiri Schwarz
Liberalni Institut
Spalena 51
11000 Praha 1, CZECH REPUBLIC
Phone: 42-2-29-25-38
Fax: 42-2-29-21-77
Andres Dauhajre
Fundacion Economia y Desarrollo
DOMINICAN REPUBLIC
Phone: (Jaime Alvarez) 703-247-8421
Fax: 809-566-7367
Romulo Lopez Sabando
Centro de Estudios del Ecuador
"Friedrich A. Von Hayek"
Av. Quito y 9 de Octubre
Ed Induato, piso 9, 903
Quayaquil, ECUADOR
Phone: 593-4-393-110
Fax: 593-4-394-746
Dora de Ampuero
Instituto Ecuatoriano de Economia Politica
Higueras 106 y Costanera (Urdesa)
Guayaquil, ECUADOR
Phone: 593-4-881-011
Fax: 593-4-885-991
Eduardo Nunez
Fundacion Salvadorena de Desarrollo
Boulevard Santa Elena
entre Calle Cerro Verde y Oromontique
Antiguo Cuscatlan Depto la Libertad
EL SALVADOR
Phone: 503-98-0243/24-4884
Fax: 503-783-369
Tiit Lillipuu
Market Economy Center
PO Box 3199
EE-0090 Tallinn, ESTONIA
Phone: 7-142-682-629
Fax: 7-142-683-156
Jacques Garello
ALEPS
35, Avenue Mac-Mahon
Paris 75017, FRANCE
Phone: 33-1-43-80-85-17
Fax: 33-1-48-88-97-57
Carole Neaumet
FRAP
42, rue des Jeuneurs
75002 Paris, FRANCE
Phone: 33-1-47-75-1807
Fax: 33-1-47-47-68-40
Henri Lepage
Institut Euro 92
21, Avenue d'Iena
Paris 75016, FRANCE
Phone: 33-1-47-23-07-07
Fax: 33-1-40-70-09-65
Bertrand Lemennicier
Institute for Humane Studies - Europe
35, Avenue Mac-Mahon
Paris 75017, FRANCE
Phone: 33-1-43-80-85-17
Fax: 33-1-48-88-97-57
Gerd Habermann
ASU-UNI
Mainzer StraBe 238
53179 Bonn, GERMANY
Phone: 2-28-954-5916
Fax: 2-28-954-5990
Gert Dahlmans
Frankfurter Institut fur
wirtschaftspolitische Forschung e V
Kaiser-Friedrich-Promenade 157
D-6380 Bad Homburg, GERMANY
Phone: 49-6172-42074
Fax: 49-6172-42355
Charles Mensah
Institute of Economic Affairs - Ghana
PO Box 01936
Christianborg Accra, GHANA
Phone: 233-21-776641
Fax: 233-21-776724
George Pagoulatos
Centre for Political Research and Information
4, Herodotou Street
106 75 Athens, GREECE
Phone: 30-1-72-48-237-8
Fax: 30-1-72-10-965
Harry Papasotiriou
EKOME
7, Pindarou str
Athens 10671, GREECE
Phone: 30-1-36-03-512
Estuardo Somayoa B
Centro de Estudios Economico-Sociales
Apartado Postal 652
Guatemala, CP 01901, GUATEMALA
Phone: 502-2-323-883
Fax: 502-2-314-968
Pablo Schneider
Centro de Investigaciones Economicas Nacionales
Ap Postal 87-C
Correos Metroquince
Guatemala, GUATEMALA
Phone: 502-2-32-3883
Fax: 502-2-31-5956
Fernando Monterroso
Universidad Francisco Marroquin
6A Calle Final Zona 10
Guatemala 01010, GUATEMALA
Phone: 502-2-34-6886/95 31-3888/90
Fax: 502-2-71-2075
Edgardo Dumas Castillo
Instituto de Estudios de Gobierno y
Libertad de Honduras
Apartado Postal 63
San Pedro Sula Cortes, HONDURAS
Richard Wong
Hong Kong Centre for Economic Research
The University of Hong Kong,
School of Economics
Pokfulam Road, HONG KONG
Phone: 852-547-8313
Fax: 852-548-6319
Hannes Gissurarson
Jon Thorlaksson Institute
Post Office Box 1577
Reykjavik 121, ICELAND
Phone: 354-1-62-0224
Fax: 354-1-26806
D R Pendse
IDEA
c/o 'Seaglimpse' lst Floor
Behind Worli Dairy
Bombay 400 018, INDIA
Phone: 204-5928
Fax: 204-8187
Richard Miller
Edmund Burke Institute
The Glebe House
Kilninor, Gorey County Wexford, IRELAND
Robert Loewenberg
Institute for Advanced
Strategic and Political Studies
3 Diskin Street
Jerusalem 92473, ISRAEL
Phone: 2-638176/638355
Daniel Doron
Israel Center for Social and Economic Progress
33, Ramban Street
92268 Jerusalem, ISRAEL
Phone: 972-2-619843
Fax: 972-2-630427
Alessandro De Nicola
Adam Smith Society
via Cornaggia 10
Milano 20123, ITALY
Phone: 39-2-85141
Fax: 39-2-89010199
Delroy Lindsay
Private Sector Organization of Jamaica
PO Box 238
Kingston 10, JAMAICA
Phone: 92-76786/92-76238
George Njiru
PO Box 50721, KENYA
Latvian Free Market Institute
c/o Latvian Liberal Party
Kronvalda bulv 9
Riga 226010, LATVIA
Phone: 0132-323162
Fax: 0132-225039
Algirdas Degutis
Catallaxis Institute for Property Relations
Post Office Box 663
2051 Vilnius, LITHUANIA
Phone: 0122-466146
Egidijus Kabasinskas
Institute of International and Political Relations
A Jakato 9
Vilnius 2000, LITHUANIA
Phone: 3702-612556
Fax: 3702-629062
Kestutis Glaveckas
Lithuania Free Market Institute
PO Box 415
2004 Vilnius, LITHUANIA
Phone: 370-2-352584
Fax: 370-2-351279
Jesus Rolando Espinosa
Centro de Estudios en Economia y Educacion
15 de Mayo 1531 Pte
Col Maria Luisa
Monterrey, CP 64040 NL, MEXICO
Phone: 52-83-44-4824
Fax: 52-83-42-7433
Luis Pazos de la Torre
Centro de Investigaciones
sobre la Libre Empresa
Camelia No 329, Col Florida, MEXICO DF 01050,
MEXICO
Phone: 52-5-661-6535/4043
Fax: 52-5-661-5410
Centro Mises
Pradera 82
Jardines del Pedregal, MEXICO, DF 01900
MEXICO
Phone: 525-652-6062
Fax: 525-568-6327
Carolina Romero de Bolivar
Instituto Cultural Ludwig Von Mises
Av 27 de Abril No 5-102
Col. Avila Camacho
53910 Naucalpan Mexico, MEXICO
Phone: 52-5-294-9253/5309
Fax: 52-5-294-9253
Rupert Silberie
Kausa Komun
Matancia 20
Willemstad Curacao, NETHERLAND ANTILLES
Phone: 599-9-3171284/86
Fax: 599-9-3171284/86
Graham Beddie
New Zealand Center for Independent Studies
Post Office Box 5776
Auckland, NEW ZEALAND
Phone: 64-9-370-933
Fax: 64-9-797618
Helge Albrektsen
Centura Foundation
PO Box 64
5001 Bergen, NORWAY
Phone: 475-901525
Fax: 475-901525
Jan Arlid Snoen
Fremskrittspartiets Utrednings Institutt
Kirkegt 7, 5 et
N-0153 OSLO, NORWAY
Phone: 472-410769/472-424355
Guillermo Chapman
Fundacion Istmena de
Estudios Economico-Sociales
Apartado 9502
Panama 4, PANAMA
Phone: 507-636744
Fax: 507-641203
Digno Martinez Lopez
Centro Paraguayo de Estudios de
Desarrollo Economico y Social
Mariscal Estigarribia 1050
Asuncion, PARAGUAY
Martin Burt
Fundacion Paraguaya de
Cooperacion y Desarrollo
Presidente Franco 846
Asuncion, PARAGUAY
Phone: 595-21-92809 90295
Julia Vellia de Arrellada
Instituto Paraguayo de
Estudios Geopoliticos e Int.
Casilla de Correo 781
Asuncion, PARAGUAY
Phone: 22273/205050
Mauricio Chabaneix Belling
Casilla Postal 220
Arequipa, PERU
Phone: 51-54-243076
Fax: 51-54-213098
Enrique Ghersi
Ama-Gi
Casilla Postal 18-1676
Lima, PERU
Phone: 51-14-413-605/3424
Fax: 51-14-459-241
Gabriel Ortiz de Zevallos
Apoyo Institute
Gonzales Larranaga 265
San Antonio, Miraflores
Lima 18, PERU
Phone: 455237/467070
Fax: 455946
Guillermo Garcia Montufar
Centro de Investigacion y Estudios Legales
Libertadores 350, San Isidro
Lima 27, PERU
Phone: 51-14-41-3424
Fax: 51-14-42-6161
Augusto Blacker-Miller
Instituto La Moneda
Av Santa Cruz # 300
Lima 27, PERU
Phone: 418228/417986
Hernando de Soto
Instituto Libertad y Democracia
Denavidez 881
Lima Lima 18, PERU
Phone: 51-14-443509/470916/469128
Fax: 51-14-751349
Jan Winiecki
Adam Smith Research Centre
Bednarska Street 16
00-321 Warsaw, POLAND
Phone: 48-2-621-4707
Fax: 48-2-628-0614
Mieczyslaw Bak
Institute for Private Enterprise and Democracy
ul Trebacka 4
11-174 Warsaw, POLAND
Phone: 48-22-26-0221/0222
Fax: 48-22-27-4673
Jan Jacek Szymona
Instytut Liberalno-Konserwatywny
ul Judyma 8
20-716 Lublin, POLAND
Phone: 488-156-7244
Pedro Arroja
Instituto de Estudios Publicos
Avenida Rodrigues de Freitas 349
Porto 4000
PORTUGAL
Phone: 351-2-568821/308735/305896
Fax: 351-2-57-5127
Daniel Stancu
Romanian Institute for Humane Studies "Liberty"
Str Av Traian Vasile
Nr 23, Et. 2, Ap 19, Sector 1
Bucharest 78336, ROMANIA
Phone: 40-1-666-4912
Fax: 40-1-312-8562
Paul Fudulu
Romanian Institute for Study of Public Choice
Nicopole 59
Brasov 2200, ROMANIA
Phone: 40-68-153619
Fax: 40-68-153619
Vitaliy Naishul
Institute for the Study of Russian Economy
Surupi 17-13
117418 Moscow, RUSSIA
Phone: 7-095-290-5108
Fax: 7-095-290-5108
Yuri Kochevrin
REFERENDUM
Kalashny per, 4-21
Moscow 103009, RUSSIA
Heritage Foundation - Moscow
Novy Arbat 19, Room 820
103025 Moscow, RUSSIA
Phone: 7-095-203-1075
Fax: 7-095-203-1856
Jan Oravec
FA Hayek Foundation
Hviezdoslavovo nam 17
810 04 Bratislava, SLOVAKIA
Phone: 42-7-331-465
Fax: 42-7-331-526
Joaquin Trigo
Fomento del Trabajo Nacional
Via Layetana, 32-34
Barcelona (3), SPAIN
Phone: 319-6100
D Alfredo Timermans
Instituto de Ecologia y Mercado
Fundacion para el Analisis y
los Estudios Sociales
c/San Agustin 15, lo dcha
28014 Madrid, SPAIN
Phone: 429-9284/9347
Fax: 429-9328
Milinda Moragoda
Center for Policy Research
3/2 Allanmathiniyarama Road
Polhengoda, Colombo 5. 1, SRI LANKA
Phone: 94-1-554-997
Fax: 94-1-510-711
Hakan Gergils
ECOFIN Media Group
Box 10325
Stockholm S-100 55, SWEDEN
Phone: 46-8-663-0407
Fax: 46-8-663-0477
Sture Eskilsson
Swedish Free Enterprise Foundation
Box 5234
Stockholm S-10245, SWEDEN
Phone: 46-8-666-9500
Fax: 46-8-663-3562
Mats Johansson
TIMBRO
Grev Turegatan 19
Box 5234
Stockholm S-102 45, SWEDEN
Phone: 46-8-670-3500
Fax: 46-8-663-3562
Robert Nef
Liberales Institut
Vogelsangstr 52
CH-8006 Zurich, SWITZERLAND
Phone: 1-364-1666
Fax: 1-363-7005
China Research Institute of Land Economics
9th Floor, Tun Hwa Building
1, Tun Hwa South Road
Taipei Taiwan 10589, TAIWAN, ROC
Chung-Hua Institution for Economic Research
75 Chang Hsing Street
Taipei Taiwan, TAIWAN, ROC
Atilla Yayla
Association for Liberal Thinking
Karanfil Sok 19/8
06650 Kizilay-Ankara, TURKEY
Phone: 90-4-312-419-4349
Fax: 90-4-312-419-4304
Madsen Pirie
Adam Smith Institute
23 Great Smith Street
London England SW1P 3BL, UK
Phone: 71-222-4995
Fax: 44-71-222-7544
Linda Whetstone
Atlas Economic Research Foundation - UK
Bassetts Manor
Hartfield Sussex TN7 4LA, UK
Phone: 44-892-770304
Fax: 44-892-770873
Ljubo Sirc
Centre for Research into Communist Economies
2 Lord North Street
London SW1P 3LB England, UK
Phone: 44-71-799-3745
Fax: 44-71-799-2137
Hector McQueen
David Hume Institute
21 George Square
Edinburgh Scotland EH8 9LD, UK
Phone: 44-31-667-7004
Fax: 44-31-667-9111
David Green
IEA Health and Welfare Unit
2 Lord North Street
London England SW1P 3LB, UK
Phone: 44-71-799-3745
Fax: 44-71-799-2137
John Blundell
Institute of Economic Affairs
2 Lord North Street
London England SW1P 3LB, UK
Phone: 44-71-799-3745
Fax: 44-71-799-2137
Digby Anderson
Social Affairs Unit
75 Davies Street, 3rd Floor
London England W1A 1FA, UK
Phone: 44-908-637-4356
Fax: 44-908-585-421
Stuart Sexton
The Education Unit
Warlingham Park School
Chelsham Common
Warlingham Surrey CR6 9PB, UK
Phone: 44-883-626844
Fax: 44-883-625501
Richard Lynn
Ulster Institute for Economic Research
University of Ulster at Coleraine
Cromore Road, Coleraine County
Londonderry BT52 1SA, UK
Robert Sirico CSP
Acton Institute for the Study of
Religion and Liberty
The Waters Building, Suite 301
161 Ottawa NW
Grand Rapids, MI, 49503, USA
Phone: 616-454-3080
Fax: 616-454-9454
Gary Palmer
Alabama Family Alliance
402 Office Park Drive Suite 300
Birmingham, AL, 35223-2416, USA
Phone: 205-870-9900
Fax: 205-870-4407
Murray Sabrin
Alliance for Monetary Education
PO Box 476
Leonia, NJ, 07605, USA
Phone: 201-947-7449
Samuel Brunelli
American Legislative Exchange Council
214 Massachusetts Avenue, NE Suite 400
Washington DC, 20002, USA
Phone: 202-547-4646
Fax: 202-547-8142
Nelson Griswold
Andrew Jackson Institute
511 Union Street Suite 1004
Nashville, TN, 37219, USA
Phone: 615-726-0247
Fax: 615-726-1824
Michael Sanera
Arizona Institute
7000 North 16th Street Suite 120-420
Phoenix, AZ, 85020, USA
Phone: 602-277-8682
Fax: 602-277-8563
John Groom
Athens Institute
1800 Diagonal Road Suite 600
Alexandria, VA, 22314, USA
Phone: 703-684-3130
Fax: 703-548-9446
Alejandro Chafuen
Atlas Economic Research Foundation
4084 University Drive Suite 103
Fairfax, VA, 22030, USA
Phone: 703-934-6969
Fax: 703-352-7530
David G. Tuerck
Beacon Hill Institute for Public Policy Research
Suffolk University
8 Ashburton Place
Boston, MA, 02108-2770, USA
Phone: 617-573-8750
Fax: 617-720-4272
Michael Rothschild
Bionomics Institute
2173 East Francisco Boulevard Suite C
San Rafael, CA, 94901, USA
Phone: 415-454-1800
Fax: 415-454-7460
Sam Staley
Buckeye Center
131 North Ludlow Street Suite 308
Dayton, OH, 45402, USA
Phone: 513-224-8352
Fax: 513-224-8457
Terrence Scanlon
Capital Research Center
727 Fifteenth Street, NW, 8th Floor
Washington DC, 20005, USA
Phone: 202-737-5677
Fax: 202-737-5692
Steve Buckstein
Cascade Policy Institute
813 SW Alder Suite 707
Portland, OR, 97205, USA
Phone: 503-242-0900
Fax: 503-242-3822
Paul Knapp
Catalyst Institute
33 North LaSalle Street Suite 1920
Chicago, IL, 60602-9739, USA
Phone: 312-541-5400
Fax: 312-541-5401
Edward Crane
Cato Institute
1000 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Washington DC, 20001-5403, USA
Phone: 202-842-0200
Fax: 202-842-3490
Sarah Thurow
Center for Critical Issues
Post Office Box 168663
Irving, TX, 75016-8663, USA
Phone: 214-717-4311
Fax: 214-717-4311, call first
Norman Kurland
Center for Economic and Social Justice
PO Box 40849
Washington DC, 20016, USA
Phone: 703-243-5155
Fax: 703-243-5935
Jeanne Allen
Center for Education Reform
1001 Connecticut Avenue, NW
Washington DC, 20036, USA
Phone: 202-822-9000
Fax: 202-822-5077
Michael McDonald
Center for Individual Rights
1300 19th Street, NW
Suite 260
Washington DC, 20036, USA
Phone: 202-833-8400
Fax: 202-833-8410
Wayne Gable
Center for Market Processes
4084 University Drive, 2nd Floor
Fairfax, VA, 22030, USA
Phone: 703-934-6970
Fax: 703-934-1578
Marsha Brekke
Center for the New West
600 World Trade Center
1625 Broadway
Denver, CO, 80021, USA
Phone: 303-572-5400
Fax: 303-572-5499
D. Allen Dalton
Center for the Study of Market Alternatives
Suite 828
PO Box 15749
Boise, ID, 83715, USA
Mitchell Pearlstein
Center of the American Experiment
2342 Plaza VII
45 South 7th Street
Minneapolis, MN, 55402, USA
Phone: 612-338-3605
Fax: 612-338-3621
Paul Beckner
Citizens for a Sound Economy
1250 H Street, NW Suite 700
Washington DC, 20005-3908, USA
Phone: 202-783-3870
Fax: 202-783-4687
Larry Arnn
Claremont Institute
4650 Arrow Highway, Suite D-6
Montclair, CA, 91763, USA
Phone: 909-621-6825
Fax: 909-626-8724
Don Eberly
Commonwealth Foundation
600 North Second Street Suite 300
Harrisburg, PA, 17101, USA
Phone: 717-231-4850
Fax: 717-231-4854
Fred Smith
Competitive Enterprise Institute
1001 Connecticut Avenue, NW Suite 1250
Washington DC, 20036, USA
Phone: 202-331-1010
Fax: 202-331-0640
Jerome Climer
Congressional Institute
316 Pennsylvania Avenue, SE Suite 403
Washington DC, 20003-1147, USA
Phone: 202-547-4600
Fax: 202-546-7689
Thomas Eversden
Constitutional Heritage Institute
608 North 108th Court
Omaha, NE, 68154, USA
Phone: 402-493-9155
Fax: 402-493-7084
Frances Smith
Consumer Alert - Washington Office
2700 S Quincy Street Suite 210
Arlington, VA, 22206, USA
Phone: 703-845-8802
Fax: 703-845-8920
Pierre Du Pont
Delaware Public Policy Institute
1201 North Orange Street Suite 501
Wilmington, DE, 19899-1052, USA
Phone: 302-655-7908
Fax: 302-655-7238
Bruce Chapman
Discovery Institute
1201 Third Avenue, 40th Floor
Seattle, WA, 98101-3099, USA
Phone: 206-287-3144
Fax: 206-583-8500
Robert McGee
Dumont Institute for Public Policy Research
236 Johnson Avenue
Dumont, NJ, 07628, USA
Phone: 201-387-1456
Fax: 201-387-0744
Thomas Carroll
Empire Foundation for Policy Research
130 Washington Avenue Suite 1000
Albany, NY, 12210-2219, USA
Phone: 518-432-4444
Fax: 518-432-6617
David Caprara
Empowerment Network Foundation
1606 King Street
Alexandria, VA, 22314, USA
Phone: 703-548-6619
Fax: 703-548-7328
John McClaughry
Ethan Allen Institute
RFD 1, Concord, VT, 05824, USA
Phone: 802-695-2555
Fax: 802-695-2555, press 5*
Robert Williams
Evergreen Freedom Foundation
PO Box 552
Olympia, WA, 98507, USA
Phone: 206-956-3482
Fax: 206-352-1874
Herbert Schlossberg
Fieldstead Institute
PO Box 11190
Burke, VA, 22009, USA
Phone: 703-644-6055
Fax: 703-644-5708
Hans Sennhoiz
Foundation for Economic Education
30 South Broadway
Irvington-on-Hudson, NY, 10533, USA
Phone: 914-591-7230
Fax: 914-591-8910
John Baden
Foundation for Research on
Economics and the Environment
4900 25th NE Suite 201
Seattle, WA, 98105, USA
Phone: 206-548-1776
Fax: 206-525-7264
Paul Weyrich
Free Congress Foundation
717 Second Street, NE
Washington, DC, 20002, USA
Phone: 202-546-3004
Fax: 202-546-7689
W Winston Elliott III
Free Enterprise Institute
9525 Katy Freeway Suite 303
Houston, TX, 77024, USA
Phone: 713-984-1343
Fax: 713-984-0409
Jacob Hornberger
Future of Freedom Foundation
11350 Random Hills Road Suite 800
Fairfax, VA, 22030-6101, USA
Phone: 703-934-6101
Fax: 703-803-1480
Griff Doyle
Georgia Public Policy Foundation
2900 Chamblee-Tucker Road, Bldg 6
Atlanta, GA, 30341, USA
Phone: 404-455-7600
Fax: 404-455-4355
Charles Heatherly
Golden State Center for Policy Studies
2012 H Street Suite 101
Sacramento, CA, 95814, USA
Phone: 916-446-7924
Fax: 916-446-7990
Jeffry Flake
Goldwater Institute
The Valley Bank Center - Concourse
201 North Central Avenue
Phoenix, AZ, 85004, USA
Phone: 602-256-7018
Fax: 602-256-7045
Joe Bast
Heartland Institute
800 East Northwest Highway Suite 1080
Palatine, IL, 60067-6516, USA
Phone: 708-202-3060
Fax: 708-202-9799
Michael Finch
Heartland Institute - Illinois
800 East Northwest Highway Suite 1080
Palatine, IL, 60067-6516, USA
Phone: 708-202-3060
Fax: 708-202-9799
Thomas Shull
Heartland Institute - Michigan
615 Griswold Suite 1509
Detroit, MI, 48226, USA
Phone: 313-961-1950
Fax: 313-961-6186
Edwin Feulner Jr
Heritage Foundation
214 Massachusetts Avenue, NE
Washington DC, 20002, USA
Phone: 202-546-4400
Fax: 202-546-8328 (main)
Steve Friedman
Horizon Institute for Policy Solutions
419 Moseley Drive
Charlottesville, VA, 22903, USA
Phone: 804-295-0295
Fax: 804-295-0295
Leslie Lenkowsky
Hudson Institute
Post Office Box 26-919
Indianapolis, IN, 46226, USA
Phone: 317-545-1000
Fax: 317-545-1384
Tom Tancredo
Independence Institute
14142 Denver West Parkway Suite 101
Golden, CO, 80401, USA
Phone: 303-279-6536
Fax: 303-279-4176
David Theroux
Independent Institute
134 Ninety-eighth Avenue
Oakland, CA, 94603, USA
Phone: 510-632-1366
Fax: 510-568-6040
Thomas Hession
Indiana Policy Review Foundation
320 North Meridian Suite 615
Indianapolis, IN, 46204-i725, USA
Phone: 317-236-7360
Fax: 317-236-7370
Conna Craig
Institute for Children
4 Brattle Street Suite 211
Cambridge, MA, 02138, USA
Phone: 617-491-4614
Fax: 617-491-4614
Lawrence Chickering
Institute for Contemporary Studies
720 Market Street
San Francisco, CA, 94102, USA
Phone: 415-981-5353
Fax: 415-986-4878
Robert Bradley Jr
Institute for Energy Research
6219 Olympia
Houston, TX, 77057, USA
Phone: 713-974-1918
Fax: 713-974-1918
William Beach
Institute for Humane Studies
4084 University Drive Suite 101
Fairfax, VA, 22030, USA
Phone: 703-934-6920
Fax: 703-352-7535
William Mellor
Institute for Justice
1001 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Suite 200 South
Washington DC, 20004, USA
Phone: 202-457-4240
Fax: 202-457-8574
John Robbins
Institute for Policy Innovation
250 South Stemmons Suite 306
Lewisville, TX, 75057, USA
Phone: 214-219-0811
Fax: 214-219-1236
Randy Simmons
Institute of Political Economy
Political Science Department
Utah State University
Logan, UT, 84322-0725, USA
Phone: 801-750-2064
Fax: 801-750-3751
Institute on Religion and Democracy
1331 H Street, NW Suite 900
Washington DC 20005, USA
Phone: 202-393-3200
Fax: 202-638-4948
Institution for World Capitalism
Jacksonville University
2800 University Boulevard North
Jacksonville, FL, 32211, USA
Phone: 904-744-3950, ext 4431
Fax: 904-744-9987
Daniel Doron
Israel Center for Social and Economic Progress
58 West 68th Street
Apartment 4 "C"
New York, NY, 10023, USA
Phone: 212-953-7700
Fax: 972-3-242-165 DD 928
Peter Schweizer
James Madison Institute
PO Box 13894
Tallahassee, FL, 32317-3894, USA
Phone, 904-386-3131
Fax: 904-386-1807
Marc Rotterman
John Locke Foundation
PO Box 17822
Raleigh, NC, 27619, USA
Phone: 919-847-2690
Fax: 919-787-8371
John Semmons
Laissez Faire Institute
828 North Poplar Court
Chandler, AZ, 85226, USA
Phone: 602-940-9824
Fax: 602-940-9824
Jerry Hill
Landmark Legal Foundation
1006 Grand Avenue, 15th Floor
Kansas City, MO, 64106, USA
Phone: 816-474-6600
Fax: 816-474-6609
Ann Miller
Landmark Legal Foundation
Center for Civil Rights
One Farragut Square South, 6th Floor
Washington DC, 20002, USA
Phone: 202-393-3360
Fax: 202-393-3345
Kenneth Clarkson
Law and Economics Center
University of Miami
Po Box 248000
Coral Gables, FL, 33124, USA
Phone: 305 284 6174
Fax: 305-284-3431
Joseph Morris
Lincoln Legal Foundation
100 West Monroe Street
Chicago, IL, 60603, USA
Phone: 312-606-0951
Fax: 312-606-0879
Robert Poole Jr
Local Government Center
3415 South Sepulveda Boulevard Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA, 90034, USA
Phone: 310-391-2245
Fax: 310-391-4395
Charles Rowley
Locke Institute
5188 Dungannon Road
Fairfax, VA, 22030, USA
Phone: 703-352-9746
Fax: 703-352-9747
Lawrence Reed
Mackinac Center
119 Ashman Street
Midland, MI, 48640, USA
Phone: 517-631-0900
Fax: 517-631-0964
Michael Coffman
Maine Conservation Rights Institute
PO Box 220
Lubec, ME, 04652, USA
Phone: 207-733-5593
William Hammett
Manhattan Institute for Policy Research
52 Vanderbilt Avenue
New York, NY, 10017, USA
Phone: 212-599-7000
Fax: 212-599-3494
Linda Chavez
Manhattan Institute/
Center for the New Community
1010 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Washington DC, 20001, USA
Phone: 202-842-3733
Fax: 202-842-3746
Imad Ahmad
Minaret of Freedom Institute
4323 Rosedale Avenue
Bethesda, MD, 20814, USA
Phone: 301-907-0947
Dave Flitner
Mountain State Legal Foundation
1660 Lincoln Street Suite 2300
Denver, CO, 80264, USA
Phone: 303-861-0244
Fax: 303-831-7379
Fred Decker
Mt. Hood Society
PO Box 1166
Portland, OR, 97207, USA
Phone: 503-753-7271
John Goodman
National Center for Policy Analysis
First Interstate Plaza
12655 North Central Expressway, Suite 720
Dallas, TX, 75243-1739, USA
Phone: 214-386-6272
Fax: 214-386-0924
Lewis Uhler
National Tax-Limitation Foundation
151 North Sunrise Avenue Suite 901
Roseville, CA, 95661, USA
Phone: 916-786-9400
Fax: 916-786-8163
James Davidson
National Taxpayers Union
325 Penn Avenue, SE
Washington DC, 20003, USA
Phone: 202-543-1300
Fax: 202-546-2086
Judy Cresanta
Nevada Policy Research Institute
935 Jones Street
Reno, NV, 89503, USA
Phone: 702-786-9600
Fax: 702-786-9604
Edward Schwarz
New England Legal Foundation
150 Lincoln Street
Boston, MA, 02111, USA
Phone: 617-695-3660
Fax: 617-695-3656
Ronald Zumbrun
Pacific Legal Foundation
2700 Gateway Oaks Drive, #200
Sacramento, CA, 95833, USA
Phone: 916-641-8888
Fax: 916-920-3444
Sally Pipes
Pacific Research Institute
755 Sansome Street Suite 450
San Francisco, CA, 94111, USA
Phone: 415-989-0833
Fax: 415-989-2411
James Peyser
Pioneer Institute for Public Policy Research
85 Devonshire Street, 8th Floor
Boston, MA, 02109, USA
Phone: 617-723-2277
Fax: 617-723-1880
Richard Stroup
Political Economy Research Center
502 South 19th Avenue Suite 211
Bozeman, MT, 59715, USA
Phone: 406-587-9591
Fax: 406-586-7555
David Kehler
Public Affairs Research Institute of New Jersey
212 Carnegie Center Suite 100
Princeton, NJ, 08540-6212, USA
Phone: 609-452-0220
Fax: 609-452-1788
Dale Bails
Public Interest Institute at
Iowa Wesleyan College
600 North Jackson Street
Mt. Pleasant, IA, 52641, USA
Phone: 319-385-3462
Fax: 319-385-3799
David Denholm
Public Service Research Council
1761 Business Center Drive Suite 230
Reston, VA, 22090, USA
Phone: 703-438-3966
Fax: 703-438-3935
Robert Poole Jr
Reason Foundation
3415 South Sepulveda Boulevard Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA, 90034, USA
Phone: 310-391-2245
Fax: 310-391-4395
David Dunn
Resource Institute of Oklahoma
5101 North Classen Boulevard Suite 707
Oklahoma City, OK, 73118, USA
Phone: 405-840-3005
Fax: 405-840-4288
D Alan Heslop
Rose Institute for State and Local Government
Claremont McKenna College, Pitzer Hall
Claremont, CA, 91711, USA
Phone: 714-621-8201
Fax: 714-621-8201, call first
Jean-Francois Orsini
Saint Antoninus Institute
4110 Fessenden Street, NW
Washington DC, 20016, USA
Phone: 202-686-0849
Fax: 202-686-0849
Robert Crawford
Smith Center for Free Enterprise Studies
610 TNRB Brigham Young University
Provo, UT, 84602, USA
Phone: 801-378-2364
Ellen Frankel Paul
Social Philosophy & Policy Center
Bowling Green State University
Bowling Green, OH, 43403, USA
Phone: 419-372-2536
Fax: 419-372-8738
Edward McMullen
South Carolina Policy Council
1419 Pendleton Street
Columbia, SC, 29201, USA
Phone: 803-779-5022
Fax: 803-779-4953
Porter Davis
Southwest Policy Institute
2403 NW 39th Expressway Suite 200
Oklahoma City, OK, 73112-8769, USA
Phone: 504-348-3777
Fax: 504-528-8221
Byron Lamm
State Policy Network
816 Mill Lake Road
Fort Wayne, IN, 46845-6400, USA
Phone: 219-637-7778
Fax: 219-637-7779
Mike Richards
Texans for an Informed Public
One Greenway Plaza, Suite 1010
Houston, TX, 77046, USA
Phone: 713-622-1150
Fax: 713-622-1150
Michael Watson
Texas Public Policy Foundation
8122 Datapoint Drive Suite 910
San Antonio, TX, 78229, USA
Phone: 210-614-0080
Fax: 210-614-2649
Daniel Lapin
Toward Tradition
Post Office Box 58
Mercer Island, WA, 98040, USA
Phone: 206-236-8734
Fax: 206-236-3288
Richard Baldwin
Washington Institute for Policy Studies
999 Third Avenue Suite 1060
Seattle, WA, 98104, USA
Phone: 206-467-9561
Fax: 206-467-0910
Paul Kamenar
Washington Legal Foundation
1705 N Street, NW
Washington DC, 20036, USA
Phone: 202-588-0302
Fax: 202-588-0371
Richard Davis
Washington Research Council
1301 Fifth Avenue Suite 2810
Seattle, WA, 98101-2603, USA
Phone: 206-467-7088
Fax: 206-467-6957
Elio Scotti
Western Books Foundation
36 West 25th Street, 9th Floor
New York, NY, 10010, USA
Phone: 212-989-6767
Fax: 212-633-0211
James Miller
Wisconsin Policy Research Institute
3107 North Shephard Avenue
Milwaukee, WI, 53211, USA
Phone: 414-963-0600
Fax: 414-963-4230
Laurence Cohen
Yankee Institute for Public Policy Studies
117 New London Turnpike
Glastonbury, CT, 06033, USA
Phone: 203-633-8188
Fax: 203-657-9444
Ramon Diaz
c/o Guyer & Regules
Plaza Independencia 811
PB 11100 Montevideo, URUGUAY
Phone: 598-2-921515 (RDiaz) 381846 JB
Fax: 598-2-925454
Ricardo Peirano
Centro de Estudios de la
Realidad Economica y Social
Paraguay 1470, Ap 201
Montevideo, URUGUAY
Phone: 598-2-912-977/911-69/923-509
Fax: 598-2-912-977
Rafael Alfonzo Hernandez
Centro de Divulgacion del
Conocimiento Economico
Av Este 2, Edif Cam de Comercio
Caracas, VENEZUELA
Phone: 58-2-571-0820/1719/3357
Fax: 58-2-576-0512
Luiz Castro Leiva
Instituto Internacional de Estudios Avanzados
Apartado 17606
Parque Central
Caracas 1015-A, VENEZUELA
Phone: 962-1907
Fax: 962-1786
Leandro Canto
Instituto La Pallosa para el
Estudio de la Accion Publica
Apartado 1770
Caracas 1010A, VENEZUELA
Phone: 582-781-3471
Fax: 582-782-5365
.c.Notes
I have written these essays and delivered these speeches over many
years without any thought that they would someday be a book. In
some cases I don't remember exactly when or where they were
distributed. Updated for 1995 edition: introduction, Libertarianism
and Humanism, Soundbites, Paranoia, Libertarian Paradoxy,
Appendix C.
Fire in the House
Written in 1993, this vivid image communicates the libertarian
vision of limited government contrasted with our present situation.
Libertarianism and Nonviolence
This is my personal favorite. It was written around 1987 and handed
out extensively ever since with minor modifications. Jim Ray and
Susan Debusk, activists in the Miami area, changed the wording
somewhat and distributed this along with responses to key values of
the greens in early 1993. The first quote is from Ludwig Von Mises
"Omnipotent Government" Arlington House, New York, 1966, p 46 and
the second is from Lanza del Vasto "Warriors of Peace" Alfred A.
Knopf, New York, 1974, p 53-4
The most dangerous drug
Written in early 1994, this focuses on what I feel is a key feature of
all oppression. The example is from "Communicating
Libertarianism".
Roots of Socialism
I usually avoid going on the offensive but here I make an exception.
Written in 1993.
Slavery Today
A recurring theme I have used often.
Deregulation Examples
One of the most recent
although I had used it
included an example of
rumor that legislation
Probably written in 1989.
works, this was written in early 1993
in talks up to a year earlier. Originally I had
auto mechanics but dropped it when I heard a
was proposed to regulate them!
Libertarians and Vegetarians
I had little faith in this approach until I described it to Dick Boddie
and he liked it. Written during lunch breaks while working at a
dental clinic in 1991. Jim Ray has distributed this with
"Libertarianism and Nonviolence".
Welfare Source
This was written in January 1994.
to anger. Be warned.
Reactions range from confusion
Libertarian or Anarchist?
Every libertarian has to deal with questions about anarchy and it is
good to have a menu of answers to fit the audience. Fear of anarchy
is also mentioned in "Communicating Libertarianism".
Sound Bites
This is a grab bag of short libertarian quips and come backs.
Updated for 1995
Excessive Government
This was published in a Southwest Florida regional newspaper called
the Suncoast News around 1985.
The Water Crisis
I sent this letter to four different newspapers and three of them
published it around 1986. It is an example of promoting libertarian
ideas without directly referring to the libertarian party.
Price Gouging
A letter to the editor from January 1994. Media laments about price
gouging will never end and neither will price gouging.
Arming Women
Another successful letter to the editor published in two papers also
around 1986.
To Feminist writer Sonia Johnson
I was fortunate to meet Sonia Johnson and thoroughly enjoyed her
book "Going Out of Our Minds". She did not agree with the letter but
her response was well thought out and well written. I regret that I
have lost it. I continue to believe that the techniques of the
women's liberation movement, such as consciousness raising, hold
much potential for the libertarian movement.
To Humanists
Although I have always had good relations with the humanists and
they consider me one of them, they generally don't like this letter
and don't want to discuss it.
To New Age Healers
This was written around 1986 as a handout at a new age health fair.
Easy Things to do for Libertarianism
This list should be modified to meet the needs of the local
organization. It is for those people who become enthusiastic about
libertarianism and ask "What can I do?".
Police Dilemma
Written in 1992.
Libertarian Pledge
Probably written in 1988.
Keep the Pledge
Written in 1993 as my input into a debate within the Libertarian
Party about dropping the pledge.
Awareness of Ignorance
Part of the 1986 Libertarian Party of Florida convention speech.
The Invisible Hand
Written in 1988 following the National convention in Seattle.
Natural Libertarianism
This is also from the 1986 Libertarian Party of Florida convention
speech.
Libertarianism and Humanism
Written in 1992. Updated for 1995.
Libertarian Responses to Ten Key Green Values
I had been trying to communicate libertarianism to the greens for
some time when I received their ten key values in a handout. I was
amazed and delighted to find that they were all expressed as
questions so I immediately set to work developing libertarian
answers. The original short answers were written in 1990 and the
expanded answers in 1992-3. Jim Ray has handed out the short
answers, with some modification, in the Miami area in 1993.
Universal Parents
This goes slightly beyond politics but it shows a common pattern
that is at the root of much confusion about political power. Written
in mid 1994.
Gift Markets
This is one of my favorite pieces that seems only to draw a luke
warm response, oh well. It comes from the 1986 Libertarian Party
of Florida convention talk.
Looking Inward
This is the introduction to the 1986 Libertarian Party of Florida
talk. Parts of this are repeated in some other essays.
What are Rights?
I have spent days arguing this with objectivists and others obsessed
with the idea of rights. The lack of progress is part of why I
generally avoid referring to rights when talking about
libertarianism. This first appeared in the 1986 Libertarian Party of
Florida convention talk.
The Ferengi Phenomenon
This was written in early 1993.
Paranoia
New for 1995.
Libertarianism From the Heart
An early work from around 1983.
a little long.
Communicating Libertarianism
Still one of my favorites although
The keynote speaker at the 1984 Libertarian Party of Florida
convention was Jim Lewis, the vice presidential candidate. I
followed him in the program and began my speech with a Monty
Python quote "and now for something completely different." This is
where I first introduced one of my favorite slogans "peaceful honest
people don't belong in jail".
Freedom is for Everyone (1987 National LP Convention)
This was a unique experience in many ways. Not only did I get to
meet Russel Means and a number of other exceptional people but for
several weeks I was possessed by the ideas embodied in FIFE. Most
of these were written for the short lived newsletter "Sound of the
FIFE".
Libertarian Duality Symbol
This was created during the 1991 National Libertarian Party
Convention.
Libertarian Paradoxy
Written in 1993. I saved this for last because I wanted readers to
be prepared by the time they reached it. Unfortunately it will
probably be a source of quotes out of context by enemies of liberty.
Updated for 1995.
Appendix A - Suggested Readings from the Libertarian Party, U.S.A.
This list appeared in the center fold of Liberty Today #3, an
outreach tabloid publication of the Libertarian Party. I thank them
for permission to include it.
Appendix B - ASG list of libertarian oriented organizations
The Advocates for Self Government published this in their
newsletter, Liberator. I thank them for permission to include it.
Appendix C - Atlas list of libertarian and free market organizations.
This list was mailed to me by the Atlas Foundation. I thank them for
permission to include it. Updated for 1995. The International Society
for Individual Liberty also publishes a large and detailed list which
they sell for a few dollars.
In addition to the books listed in the appendixes I have a few
favorites of my own.
I recommend anything by Ludwig von Mises, several of his works are
in the suggested readings. "America's Great Depression" by Murray
Rothbard overcame my initial skepticism about free market
economics. For a different view of anarchy vs government in the
third world read "The Other Path" by Hernando De Soto. This is
described in the article "Deregulation Examples". "The Ego and His
Own" by Max Stirner is radical individualist anarchist writing for
those who find libertarianism too tame. My favorite science fiction
novel is "The Time Machine", a classic by H. G. Wells. It is short, full
of action, highly political, and completely unlike the movie.
As a source of books I recommend:
The Philosophy Store
P. O. Box 13736
Gainesville, FL
32604
Telephone (904) 378-6370
This is small book store with a big selection of libertarian, free
market, and related books. John Asfour will special order titles he
doesn't stock.
I hope you enjoy reading "Beyond Government" as much as I enjoyed
writing it. Please write and tell me what you think.
Harry Reid
Box 642
Safety Harbor, FL
34695
harry@chaospark.com
y y U @ W? w
ªm ?U