After we had the great opportunity to sit down with Ron Paul in Lake Jackson, TX office we hit the road, driving north on 288 toward Houston, where we had a meetup later that evening. Off the west side of the highway we saw a collection of busts of former presidents. Obviously someone thought these guys were such good people that they deserved to be showcased.
For more on this check out The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History by Tom Woods and The Cult of the Presidency by Gene Healy.
Over on the Mises Institute blog, Stephan Kinsella blogs about this miserably inadequate post from a blogger who claims that the breaking-and-entering on the part of the thugs and thieves from ACORN, along with the assistance of their trained parasite squatters, is “libertarian.” He asks everyone to please support ACORN’s efforts to allow freeloaders to live in houses they cannot possibly finance via their own means. Read Stephan’s post for his interesting take on foreclosure resistance, legalese, and Ayn Rand.
I really didn’t want to give him any more attention, but it gets worse than the post Kinsella links to. This post is even more comical. First the blogger says that it is “particularly sad to see Karen DeCoster continually gushing about [Rick] Santelli.” Actually, “continually gushing” = exactly two posts where I mentioned him. Outside of enjoying Rick Santelli’s wild speech on CNBC, I don’t continually gush. Google will prove that well enough. Perhaps Mr. Brad should put away the thesaurus. Second, he says that I “so easily disregard the clear implications of Rothbardian property theory.” He builds in a link to “implications of Rothbardian property theory,” yet the link he builds in points to this post, by him, that does not explain how ACORN antics are “Rothbardian property theory.” He just states “the homes in question are property of the banks have no merit in terms of libertarian theory. Resistance to foreclosures is thus fully libertarian.” That’s it. It is because he says so. The reason he doesn’t support his point with actual links or scholarship from Rothbard is because there is no such thing that exists, from Rothbard, that can support such nonsense.
Of course, those of us who have studied Rothbard, or even those who have known him intimately – like a few people on this site – know that Murray Rothbard would not place himself side-by-side with the ACORN gang of thugs, cheering on their pathetic property grabs at the expense of legitimate owners.
Another important point is that the blogger completely ignores the dismal record of the squatter in question, Donna Hanks, a perpetual ne-er-do-well and professional property plunderer who attempted to live way, way beyond her means at the expense of everyone else, including her creditors. In this post, I linked to the place where you can find the legal records online. The blogger has no quarrel about her refusal to make her mortgage payments even after she refinanced her ATM house and took out $200,000 in cash to blow it on….well, who knows.
The blogger is one of a small group of left-wing (self-described), autarkist, “free-market”-but-anti-capitalist, mutualist, anarcho-syndicalist, agorist, socialist non-libertarians who call their doctrine the real “libertarianism.” They post all kinds of cute, little banners and sayings and signage and logos on their blogs. And for some reason, some of them try to hold up Rothbard as one of their own. To them, Lew Rockwell.com is a brand of “vulgar libertarianism,” meaning people who don’t “correctly apply libertarian principles.”
They are pro-union, favor the proletariat, and hate corporations. They think corporations are illegitimate entities. Perhaps their most farcical claim is that those of us who work wage jobs are wage slaves. (See my post on this.) If you voluntarily contract with a company or individual to produce goods or services for wages, you are a part of the wage-slavery society. This is based on their hatred of formal organization and hierarchy (even if voluntary), as well as envy of careerists and people who earn a high wage. Rothbard spent his entire career fighting these types – he called them the luftmenschen. In fact, Ben O’Neill took apart their “wage-slavery” myth in an article for Mises.org in January 2009.
It’s actually too zany to take seriously, but people should know how this splinter group could possibly come to support the hideous group ACORN and claim that they are acting upon libertarian principles.
bosco… your take?
While I get what Mr. Spangler is getting at it’s very vague and as said above I doubt very much Rothbard (from my readings) would support any such action. Simply because banks are little less than a branch of the government in many respects that does not negate any legitimacy in their property titles. Criminals still have property rights. Rights to those things otherwise legitimately obtained. And in the case at hand where the home had been sold to a new couple it seems they have no case. Even if you subscribe to usage based property rights it was obvious that this property while not being currently lived in was being worked on. Any system which legitimizes that type of usage policy would get very little support in general.
Posted by Stephan Kinsella at January 22, 2009 06:59 AM
The Mises Institute is proud to announce the launch of a new, online journal today: Libertarian Papers. Edited by yours truly and boasting a impressive and geographically- and academically diverse Editorial Board, Libertarian Papers is publishing its first seven articles today, one per hour starting at 8:00 a.m. CST. These include articles by two eminent libertarian thinkers, Jan Narveson (writing on Nozick, justice, and restitution) and Robert Higgs (on depressions and war). These are followed by two, count ‘em, two, previously unpublished memos from … Ludwig von Mises and Murray Rothbard. Mises’s is a memo dated New Year’s Eve, 1946, to F.A. Hayek, relaying his concerns and advice about the then-nascent Mont Pèlerin Society. Rothbard’s is a 1961 “confidential” memo the Volker Fund, about libertarian tactics and strategy. Provocative, fascinating stuff.
The last three articles to be published today are a fascinating three-part exchange between Nicolás Maloberti and Joshua Katz about libertarianism, positive rights, and “Possibility of the Legitimate State.”
Argh… more stuff to read.
Now I am not usually a doom-and-gloom guy. I developed the Liberty Dollar to bring a real solution to the currency situation that I realized in 1974… some 34 years ago! And for all these years I have strived to bring about a proven, positive, peaceful and profitable solution to our country’s controlled fiat monetary system.
And while I greatly appreciated your support (ala the Choir), at almost every turn there has been an invisible force that has thwarted the Liberty Dollar development and larger use. At first you may think, I mean the government. That is not the case. The government had been amazingly supportive up until the raid. The most disturbing “invisible force” is bunch of traitors who confess to have the very ideals that you think they endorse. Unfortunately, most of the time I found our supposed “leaders” to be vain little men, who were much more interested in maintaining their position than saving the country.
Who are these traitors who have steadfastfully blocked or secretly worked to undermine the Liberty Dollar and its ideals? Well over the years I have made several lists, but I am now on Tour and time has long dulled that list… but it is easy to list a few and you may know a few more from your own efforts with the Liberty Dollar.
List of Bellybuttons:
Lew Rockwell, Von Mises Institute
Mark Skousen, Newsletter
Bill Bonner, Agora Publishing
Addison Wiggin, Newsletter
John McManus, John Birch Society
Ed Crane, Cato Institute
Jack Pugsley, Sovereign Society
Vin Suprynowicz, Las Vegas reporter
Charley Reese, Orlando reporter
Sheldon Richman, writer
Doug Casey, Newsletter
Franklin Sanders, Moneychanger-my-ass
Jim Cook, Investment Rarities
Peymon Mottahedeh, Freedom Law School
Ron Paul, Politician
I contacted every one of these bellybuttons. Each had the opportunity to really advance the ideals of liberty but didn’t. They are liars and traitors to the ideals that you may think they support. I would never trust any of them. None will address the issues or even state their objections to the Liberty Dollar. Most will not even reply. A few have said I don’t like them because they would not endorse the Liberty Dollar. Hell, I have never asked for an endorsement from anyone and don’t care if someone endorses the Liberty Dollar or not. But I brand these traitors as bellybuttons because they stonewall, back stab and take adverse positions against the Liberty Dollar while publicly stating that they support the very same ideals but refuse to enter a discourse to move a viable solution forward.
As a student of Austrian Economics, I was particularly drawn to the Mises Institute so I made an appointment to meet Lew Lockwell. When the day finally arrived, his secretary kept me waiting for an hour, then he stood me up and had me forcibly evicted into a driving Alabama rainstorm without a car. Nice business manners, eh?! For that and ten years of behind-the-scenes of negativity, I name Prickwell king bellybutton of the government controlled opposition. Skousen, Bonner, McManus, Crane and Casey are not far behind. Be very careful of whom you ask advice. If you have any doubts, just ask this list of American traitors, because I have and they all made me sick.
Contrary to these lying bellybutton traitors, there have been a great many “ordinary Joes” who have exemplified the greatness of our original Founding Fathers. These men and women have won my heart, not because they support the Liberty Dollar, but because they have devoted their lives, fortunes and sacred honor to furthering the ideals as represented by the Liberty Dollar.
I don’t know what happened at his appointment nor do we know why he’s pissed at the rest of those listed but I’m not getting the feeling that it was anything to garner this kind of response. In my opinion the Liberty Dollar little more than a scam. Selling a one troy ounce silver round for $50 is 3.66 times the spot price of $13.64 (bought in 50 to 100 troy oz batch) at the time of writing. They then attempt to use the $50 face valued coin as if it was worth as much as a $50 FRN. As the cost of silver rose so did the profit margin when it was re-minted with a higher face value. It is no wonder that these individuals didn’t want to associate themselves with von NotHaus and the Liberty Dollar. It’s obviously of questionable legality (not that any of those listed agree with that status but they likely don’t want to be directly affiliated with that) and it questionable morally too. If someone wishes to invest in metals the Liberty Dollar is a complete waste of money and if you wish to use metals as a currency or barter buying generic rounds is not only significantly cheaper but it doesn’t have the legal issues. Those “ordinary Joes”, of which I know a few personally, who are RCOs or are purchasers and users of the Liberty Dollars were suckered into a pyramid scheme.
The idea is right but the implementation is just too off to be an honest business.
- Introduction: Money and Politics
- The Genesis of Money
- What is the Optimum Quantity of Money?
- Monetary Inflation and Counterfeiting
- Legalized Counterfeiting
- Loan Banking
- Deposit Banking
- Problems for the Fractional-Reserve Banker: The Criminal Law
- Problems for the Fractional-Reserve Banker: Insolvency
- Booms and Busts
- Types of Warehouse Receipts
- Enter the Central Bank
- Easing the Limits on Bank Credit Expansion
- The Central Bank Buys Assets
- Origins of the Federal Reserve: The Advent of the National Banking System
- Origins of the Federal Reserve: Wall Street Discontent
- Putting Cartelization Across: The Progressive Line
- Putting a Central Bank Across: Manipulating a Movement, 1897-1902
- The Central Bank Movement Revives, 1906-1910
- Culmination at Jekyll Island
- The Fed at Last: Morgan-Controlled Inflation
- The New Deal and the Displacement of the Morgans
- Deposit “Insurance”
- How the Fed Rules and Inflates
- What Can Be Done?