Democracy and War

“Every war in which the United States has engaged since 1815 was waged in the name of democracy.  Each has contributed to that centralization of power which tends to destroy that local self-government which is what most Americans have in mind when they acclaim democracy.”  ~ Felix Morley, Freedom and Federalism (1959), p. 121.

I saw this quote when reading a post by Dr. Thomas DiLorenzo today. It reminded me that there is little hope of constraining a government  so as to keep it within some reasonable bounds. Governments grow in power and control of the people until the people become slaves or they revolt: or both. The idea that your local town’s government would be the most important one to your life is the idea that America was founded upon. It has failed and war had a large role in that failure.

Humanitarian War

The urge to save humanity is almost always only a false-face for the urge to rule it. ~H. L. Mencken

“Every empire tells the world it is unlike all empires; that its mission is not to plunder, control but to educate, liberate.” – Edward Saïd

“History reminds us that civilizations are created and sustained by individuals; they are destroyed by collectives.” ~Butler Shaffer

“Liberty and democracy become unholy when their hands are dyed red with innocent blood.” ~Mahatma Gandhi

Millions of men and women have realized that there is no such thing as “humanitarian war”. There is only war. If some country starts a war then they have committed the greatest of evils. If some country defends itself against an invasion then they are in the right. The problem with the USA is that it has started dozens upon dozens of wars both overt and covert while claiming these aggressions were either “humanitarian” or that they were “defensive”. Lies. Lies on stilts.

A simple idea …

A libertarian is simply someone who is for liberty and against aggression. He does not want to see force initiated against himself or others. Force is to be used only in self defense and the libertarian would say that someone may rightly use force against the person or property of another only to end an unjust attack or to to secure compensation for the damages from an unjust attack. Can conduct that is not aggressive amount to the mistreatment of others? Yes, and this mistreatment can reduce that person’s freedom to make choices about their own lives. This is morally wrong in many ways, but would be “legal” under the ideas of libertarianism.

Agorism

What is in a name? There are so many ways to build a system that excludes the State; but in the end, is it not all the same if the State and its raw force is eliminated?

In a market anarchist society, law and security would be provided by market actors instead of political institutions. Agorists recognize that situation can not develop through political reform. Instead, it will arise as a result of market processes.

As the state is banditry, revolution culminates in the suppression of the criminal state by market providers of security and law. Market demand for such service providers is what will lead to their emergence. Development of that demand will come from economic growth in the sector of the economy that explicitly shuns state involvement (and thus can not turn to the state in its role as monopoly provider of security and law). That sector of the economy is the counter-economy – black and grey markets.

Different people have different ideas about how to get from our present fascist state of affairs to the freedom and liberty of market a revolutionary market anarchism, and yet when all is said and done only educating the masses will succeed. How to do that? Ah, that is the question.

A black day for a biologist

At overlawyered.come I saw:

The 1972 Marine Mammal Protection Act bans feeding protected dolphins, seals and whales. A grand jury has now indicted licensed marine biologist Nancy Black, who sought to record the behavior of killer whales by rigging attachments to some killed prey that the predators were in the process of eating. Black’s attorney says she also faces a charge of lying to federal investigators because when asked to turn over evidence she gave them footage of the incident that she had already edited for reasons unrelated to the investigation. [The Economist]

I wonder if Nancy Black can appreciate the black humour of her situation? Seems that she has been arrested for doing science!