http://www.lewrockwell.com/…

When one walks into a business, most often you are greeted. As part of treating customers as their very livelihood, companies usually enact policies that make it a requirement for employees to acknowledge the arrival of a client or customer.

Imagine, however, if instead of getting a “hello” or “good morning,” the manager of the store asks you to greet him. Further, imagine if the manager holds you at gunpoint and threatens you with imprisonment. Assuming you could escape, chances are that you’d never go back to that store. Yet this is what happens in the courts.

Virtually everyone in the courtroom has to rise when the judge enters. Failure to do so might result in contempt of court – you can get a fine or be sentenced to jail time for your audacity. This is, of course, absurd. First of all, government courts are financed through taxation. People who do not use the system at all, for example, still have to pay. This is a form of redistribution, also known as socialism. Aside from the fact that the resources to run the system are extracted aggressively, often the accused are victims rather than victimizers.

Laws and ordinances regulating peaceful drug or firearm possession or usage, municipal codes regulating assembly, zoning, prostitution and gambling, for example, violate no rights and therefore have no victims. Thus, when an innocent person is brought (violently or through the threat thereof) to one of those government courts, the last thing one expects is to be further humiliated by having to stand for the judge. If anything, the judge should be kissing the defendant’s feet and begging for forgiveness.

We should not be surprised that the state does whatever possible to ascertain its aggressive political power in every instance; the courtroom is not an exception. Perhaps in the old days it was customary to rise for the judge. So what? Today, however, I see this not as a gesture of respect but as a demand for obedience. The judge, a state bureaucrat, has no authority over anyone. Prove that the judge and the court deserve any respect. After all, they were the ones (along with the legislative and executive branches) to kidnap people from their homes, families and places of employment, only to be dragged to face “justice.” Show that, especially in the case of victimless crimes, the defendant should stand for the judge. The concept of contempt of court, so long as the state holds a monopoly over this institution, is a farce. I believe is the court, along with all the thugs it employs, who is in contempt.

Anyone willing to show the violence of the court by refusing to obey is a hero. Rising for the judge is bowing to the state.

November 17, 2008

Manuel Lora [send him mail] works at Cornell University as a TV and multimedia producer. Visit his blog.

… or Secession Day or antiauthoritarian day or …

A few articles to check out while waiting for the hotdogs and burgers to cook.

A Fresh Look at Holidays - Butler Shaffer

Just how far we have contorted our thinking about “independence day” is reflected in most people’s thinking about fireworks. Like private gun-ownership, our personal use of fireworks represents too much power in the hands of individuals. And so, we confine ourselves to the absurdity of having the state celebrate our liberty and independence for us!

July 4th In Bizarro World - Manuel Lora

What follows are just a few of the July 4th lies and errors that we are supposed to blindly accept:

• The military is glorious, its heroes heroic, and our support is patriotic
• Freedom is about authority
• The police keep us safe and have a duty to protect us
• We are better off now than when the war on drugs started decades ago
• Continually increasing prices is a product of the market and thus the central bank must control credit and the money supply
• With proper reform, government can become efficient, especially if we elect the right leaders
• The Constitution gives people rights
• The government has been formed by the consent of the governed
• Without the state regulating/subsidizing/taxing/prohibiting activity or industry X, said industry or activity would be produced in quantities and/or qualities that are too high or too low; or would run rampant, cartelize and monopolize the market; or would not survive in a predatory competitive environment
• The more politically democratic things are, the better for everyone
• No matter what the cost to the public, protecting the children/our veterans/our senior citizens/our teachers is always the number one priority
• The free movement of goods and people destroys jobs and threatens our standard of living
• Businesses have no incentives to keep their customers safe; licenses ensure fair practices
• The law may occasionally be wrong, but it should nonetheless be followed always
• We must forever give up essential liberties to guarantee safety: it’s for your own good

Happy Secession Day! - Thomas DiLorenzo

That’s what Thomas Jefferson would be celebrating today. Unlike so many Americans, he would not be celebrating the American empire, with its “unitary executive,” swarms of tax-collecting bureaucrats, its militarization of society, protectionism, economic fascism, suspension of habeas corpus, domestic spying, etc., etc. The Hamiltonian republic that we now live under, which is celebrated by the liberal/left and neocons alike, is the opposite of Jefferson’s dream of an “empire of liberty.”

And of course there is the Decleration of Independence. Agreed upon on July 2nd and officially recognized on the 4th.

I’d imagine if you watch mises.org or lewrockwell.com today you’ll get plenty of other articles on the topic of freedom, secession, etc.