Skip to main content

The Party Once More

  The following is excerpted from "The Party Once More", written by Murray N. Rothbard for the May, 1972 issue of The Libertarian Forum. "More substantially, Mr. Nolan writes that the primary purpose of the Libertarian Party is not immediate electoral victory but to educate the public in libertarian ideas. We never thought otherwise. But the problem with this approach - a long-standing objective of minor parties - is that the psychology of the mass of the public being educated is overlooked.  Let us take, for example, the poor old Socialist Labor Party, which, doggedly, every four years for nearly a century, has been nominating Presidential candidates and gettting them on the ballot. What impact on the electorate has the SLP achieved? The problem is that the party has been so small, so flagrantly unviable, that the educational impact for socialism by the SLP has ranged sternly from zero to negative.  For what is the reaction of the public? The reaction of the average cit
Post a Comment

Thinly veiled Tyranny


The sheep in the herd, the voters, are more than willing to hand out whips to anyone "in charge." Nobody is free from sin in a democratic environment and that kind of structure teaches participants to punish behavior you oppose by appealing to the structure itself. It is a weird practice. You can stick your nose in anyone's business without having to actually do much more than writing an e-mail or gather with like-minded around a digital campfire somewhere and hope some of it will reach the political class. 


"There should be a law!" Heard that one before?

The right-wing part of Swedish Twitter built a dog-pile over an article that a local Green Party politician wrote. An article where he had the audacity to suggest that parents rule over their children.[1]

When you hear it like that it doesn't make sense, right? Why would right-wingers be against that? Don't they understand parenting and parental rights in the Swedish conservative movement? Ah, but I intentionally left out the full range of the topic by choice. I only revealed the part I cared about. Here is the rest: It was about the be or not to be of veils (hijabs) on kids.

Once you see the full picture you get the outrage.

It is a lot easier to express "I don't like this, I want it gone!" through a proxy structure that does all the hard work for you than having to take the hard road of change through interacting with real human beings. Once the chain of command of the Government gets ahold of the idea and transforms it into a public prohibition that is supported by force and an unsympathetic system.

"We did it! We outlawed hijabs! We freed the children!"

You also made ski masks, diver suits, traditional folk dresses, bandanas and everything else you can think of that a kid could cover her hair with illegal, genius.


"Oh, snap. Ok, we can fix that with some revision. After all, there should be a law!"

And that is how a detail-controlling silly law meant to prevent behavior X is born and mutated into a monster of a law text. Linguistical experts sit down and try to write down magic and get nothing but tragedy. Or tyranny, if you will.

It is not what is on the head of children that is the issue. The issue is how it got there. Was it placed with force?

We already have a law against that. Even if you are not a fan of state-monopolist law, I am sure you can agree on that forcing someone (kid or not) to do something against their will is bad. I don't know a single person that would be okay with that, at face value. Granted, it is a lot harder to punish bad behavior through social means, but it is necessary to keep freedom as a concept living.

And then we have those that turn into little tyrants as soon as they see something they don't like and as a rule of thumb, I let those people play Stalin all by themselves.

- Alex Utopium.
Anti-Establishment blogger at Utopium. Living on a steady diet of coffee and whiskey. Want to lend a hand in the coffee department? Click here to send coffee money. Click here to send curse words.

-------------------------------
[1] You can read the article in question here - Text in Swedish.


Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Dear America, I Won't Be Locking Down

Dear America I won’t be locking down, not that I ever did. And I don’t care about the arbitrary mandates of a geriatric pedophile with a history of dementia. I don’t wear the muzzle or social distance. Nor do I have any plans to start. I won’t be avoiding friends or family & I actively seek out large public gatherings. Needless to say, it’ll be a cold, cold day in hell before the government injects my living body with a foreign substance or keeps me from my family on Thanksgiving Day. You see, I knew from day one that COVID was a hoax. More specifically, when videos of Chinese people dropping dead in the streets were being broadcasted by Western propaganda outlets, it became clear this was essentially a soft coup. As a general rule, anything coming from the CCP should immediately be assumed to be intentionally falsified for malicious purposes. Friends, what has happened is obvious. The political cartel has manufactured a virus because fear enables them to seize power & furthers
Post a Comment
Read more

Against the LP

Agorism has no room for politics.  The Agora & political institutions can coexist no more than a state of marriage & bachelorhood can coexist. Counter-economics & politicking are likewise mutually exclusive. Frankly, it should seem obvious that engaging in politics & anti-politics is contradictory & self-defeating. It wouldn’t make much sense to get chemo in the morning & smoke a pack of Marlboros in the evening, so why would one seek to destroy the government today, and empower it tomorrow?  Just as a chemist who tests a logically inconsistent theory will experience failure, so too will social scientists & revolutionaries experience failure when they pursue inconsistent theories.  Note that without exception - every gain made by the liberty community in the past 15 years has been produced by the counter-economy & that no other faction of our movement can claim even a small victory . Here’s a brief look at the scoreboard: Whereas the LP & small gov
1 comment
Read more

In Defense of Left Libertarianism

Marx was right, but Marxism is stupid. Let me explain… Marx’s fundamental critique that the working class is being exploited by the upper class is true. This is so inherently obvious in the modern political climate that I find it bewildering the notion even needs defending. In fact, today, the working class has been so thoroughly exploited that they can now be more accurately termed the working poor . Go to Manhattan, the neoliberal shithole from whence I came - and try to find a worker who both lives & resides there. You can’t. There aren’t any. The elites have successfully used a combination of high taxes & a denial of civil liberties to expel the working class from their homes. Trust me, I am among the expelled. The anarcho-capitalist habit of turning a blind eye to class theory is a grave mistake, as it sweeps real concerns under the rug. In doing so they dismiss the plight of an enormous contingent of the public - labor. No, we agorists aren’t seeking an abandonment of met
6 comments
Read more