Liberty Hangout, I Hardly Knew Ye

Ex-Special Forces soldier Michael Yon wrote that sometimes the strongest negotiating position is to walk away and mean it.  Last night I walked away from Liberty Hangout. It was fun while it lasted (short as that was). I bear them no ill will at all since it's a page supposedly dedicated to voluntarism.  I volunteered one way and clearly they volunteered in another. But I won't be made a fool of by people who don't respect me.

I only wish they'd been respectful enough to just tell me they prefer to promote Donald Trump, and they weren't interested in my 6 (now 9) articles on making liberals into libertarians. I wish them the best, which I feel is a lot more than I ever got from them. It became apparent over the course of the last week that I was being censored because of my vocal Libertarian skepticism of the Trump regime, as well as my eagerness to recruit new libertarians from the Left.  If the Left had enough good prospects for Murray Rothbard, then it has enough good prospect for me.  It was time to part ways peacefully.  I'm taking my free labor elsewhere.  This is what it looks like when ‘the market’ makes decisions.

I’m deeply concerned about the direction the website is going in the way it glosses over the Keynesianism in President Trump's economic policies.  I had high hopes that I’d actually get to promote voluntarism, but I have a hard time reconciling how its voluntarist owners, based on frequent social media posts, could believe that dropping people from helicopters for what’s basically left-wing thought crime is somehow moral and acceptable.

Anyway, it's over. Minus the Trump propaganda, I really do hope Liberty Hangout climbs in the web rankings because neoconservatives need to be exposed to libertarian ideas.

Books, Heartbreak, and Alcohol Drama (The Boredom—Week 1, Part 1)

Thank you for reading more about my quest to do meaningful, productive things while I kill time before returning to my amazing job that I love.

Day 3.  Sunday had a productive start.  Not only did I open both eyes, but I even managed to crawl out of bed and slide into some clothes that were probably clean.  I decided to press my winning streak by writing some more—the more I write, the more I can publish and share with the world.

I sat down for a good minute and I wrote a libertarian review of The Hunger Games: Mockingjay Part 1.  The review primarily focuses on guerrilla warfare in Mockingjay and ties that imagery into Murray Rothbard’s writings on guerrilla warfare in the American Revolutionary War (Rothbard, Conceived in Liberty, Vol. IV, ch. 3).  This one has been one of my more highly trafficked articles of late, so I’m pleased at the exposure it’s getting.

I burst out of my creative trance, hightailed it through the shower and picked up both of my teenage nephews at noon.  I like to spend as much time with those boys as possible, especially since their old man took off years ago.  It’s good bonding time, plus I get to talk to them about things that matter.

My nephews and I enjoy seeing movies together.  I took them both to see the awful Red Dawn remake, and the younger one accompanied me to Frankenstein and The Bride of Frankenstein on the big screen.  This time, I took the boys to see Fury before it’s out of theaters.  They really wanted to see it, I certainly didn’t mind seeing it again, and I figured this is a good way to round of the last two WW2 movies I’d showed them: Schindler’s List and Saving Private Ryan.

I don’t know what it is about this generation of kids, but they’re way too fond of Holocaust jokes and Call of Duty has made them all think they know what war is.  Basically these intense, gut-wrenching, realistic movies have given them an idea of what violence and suffering really look like.  They’re great teaching aides and Fury was a great finishing touch, with its depiction of Allied misconduct in the war while it still praises the overall heroism and courage of the Greatest Generation.

The boys enjoyed the movie and got something out of it.

Sunday night I got together with some good friends for a backyard bonfire.  Not gonna lie, I take great pride in the fact that I can build a fire in this age of technology.  I figure if some natural disaster happens and the power grid goes out, a lot of people are going to suffer needlessly.  Other than that, knowing how to build a fire is super nice for relaxing outside in cold weather.

Day 4, Monday, was largely uneventful.  I wrote a bit before working on manuscripts for near-future publications.

In 2015 I plan on launching an independent publishing house.  This won’t be like Political Spectrum Publishing.  I’m very proud of PSP and the amazing book it produced—VOICES OF REVOLUTION: Americans Speak Out for Ron Paul.  However, after the Voices book was released and it became increasingly clear Ron Paul wouldn’t be the Republican nominee, the whole train lost steam.  Also, real-life commitments got in the way (such as other campaigns I worked, my job, a toxic relationship, and of course, finishing college).

PSP was a great learning experience, but that was the worst time in my life to have tried—or half-assed—to start a business.

Realistically, a startup business is more like a newborn baby than a Giga Pet—if you don’t know what those are, thanks for making me feel old!

Therefore, my new publishing house is going to be something I can show my own father, look him in the eye, and be proud.  Hey, if I’m not proud to present something to the man I respect most, what business do I have presenting it to the world and even asking for their money?

I’m tentatively calling it The American Liberty Library (ALL). The name is catchy yet meaningful—the focus will be both fiction and nonfiction books that simultaneously entertain or engage and promote libertarian ideas.  Other than forming my business model and plan, I’ve actually been preparing product, hence my working on manuscripts.

Of course the American Liberty Library will be my preferred method of publishing my own books—almost done with #3!—but that won’t be all.  It’ll include some essential classics like Tocqueville’s Democracy in America and the writings of Bastiat, but I’ve also been doing hours of searching for dormant manuscripts.  There are many remarkable books on liberty and in sync with libertarian ideas, but they’ve been lost to time and are in the public domain.  I think it’s time some of these forgotten classics made a comeback!

Tuesday, Day 5 of the Boredom, was an interesting day to say the least!

Ever since we saw each other Friday night, the special gal from Rancho was been acting very strange toward me.  Tuesday morning I found out what I needed to know.  I wish she had just been honest with me instead of getting my hopes up, but it’s better to know anyhow.  Now I don’t have to wonder.

I went to the gym and had a great workout to get my mind off of things.  Then I swung by In ‘N’ Out for a protein-style Double-Double and animal-style fries, washing it all down with a cold Dr. Pepper.  It was a feast fit for kings!

I finished digitally restoring the manuscript for Harold Frederic’s 1893 novel, The Copperhead.  Some of you may be familiar with the novel’s movie adaptation, Copperhead, by Gettysburg director Ronald F. Maxwell.  It’s a well-written novel and has a totally different ending than its film adaptation, so this is good!

That evening, I picked up some friends for what was to be an amazing night out.  For months, whenever I’m in town, I’ve headed up to the Saddleback Inn at Lake Arrowhead, California for karaoke and fun times.  The people there are always really cool and there’s never drama, only people trying to enjoy themselves.

Unfortunately, it was dead that night.  I’ve never seen this normally-cracking place so entirely dismally dead.  Therefore, one of my friends decided it wasn’t going to be a good night.  He got ridiculously drunk—we hadn’t even been there an hour before he was smashed—and he ended up getting belligerent and talking a ton of trash to the bartenders.

Needless to say, the owner of the establishment personally asked us to get him the hell out of there.  Basically, I’d driven everyone there for a solid one-hour each way drive, for us to be home by 11.  That night was a loss.  I was really disappointed that one of my closest friends could make such an ass of himself in public and embarrass me in front of people I respect at one of my favorite hangout spots.  They were all cool about it, they knew he was drunk, etc., but the company you keep is the name you carry, and they’re going to remember that I brought that guy.

Day 6, Wednesday, I woke up a little later than planned.  I emailed a client regarding a side job, and then did what was unpleasant, but necessary.  I called the girl from Rancho to give the breakup talk.  She didn’t answer; I didn’t expect her to.  So I left a long voice mail balancing a list of grievances with respect and the promise that I would neither cause her any drama nor stand in the way of her happiness.

So here I am.  Now, I’m off to go do something useful.  Check back in a few days for another update on The Boredom.

* * *

Mockingjay Part 1 art is the property of Lionsgate films and other respective owners and stakeholders, used here according to Fair Use laws for the promotion of the movie. Copperhead movie poster is the property of Swordspoint Productions, Brainstorm Media, and other respective owners and stakeholders, used here according to Fair Use laws.

Guerrilla Warfare in 'Hunger Games: Mockingjay Part 1' (libertarian film review)

WARNING

This libertarian movie review contains SPOILERS.

These spoilers DO NOT give away the plot, but they do reveal certain things viewers will see in the movie.

You’ve been warned.

The Hunger Games: Mockingjay Part 1, starring Jennifer Lawrence, is a thrilling action/sci-fi film about a revolutionary war in a dystopian future.  Like its predecessors in the Hunger Games Saga, Mockingjay Part 1 is remarkably well made and will keep viewers glued to their seats.  However, the “Part 1” in the title should clue people in to the fact that the movie is a total cliffhanger.

The setting itself hardly needs to be analyzed to find the striking libertarian imagery.  In Panem we see an oppressed people living and dying under the yoke of a totalitarian government—a massive surveillance and police state.  First there is Katniss Everdeen’s individual defiance against the state through seizing freedom of speech and expression in the Hunger Games.  In the second installment, we see the birth pangs of the revolution amidst the Quarter Quell Games.  In the third and fourth installments—Mockingjay parts 1 and 2—we see the revolution become a brutal civil war.

Because the film is divided into two parts of two hours each, the producers could afford to take their time telling the story.  Therefore, the exposition is slow and the plot is slower to unfold.  This first half is less about the revolutionary war to overthrow the Capital than it is about Katniss Everdeen’s transformation from stunned tribute into the Mockingjay, the face of the revolution.

One of the benefits of slower, longer movies is the increase in time spent on showing depth and detail in the story, characters, and setting.  We get a heavier taste of Katniss’ post-traumatic stress following the games, as well as new challenges to her fragile sanity as the war begins to take its toll on loved ones.  We also have time to see the general way of life in the rebel capital, District 13.  These glimpses create an authentic look and feel of wartime, combining images that cross World War II with the Fallout video game series.

Even more intriguing is Katniss’ interaction with President Coin, the rebel head-of-state played by Julianne Moore. Coin’s stirring speeches to her soldiers and their Spartan, in-unison responses invoke mental images of the post-World War II archetypal dictator, fist high in the air, riling up the troops.  This causes viewers to question whether the rebel cause is a just cause—after all, replacing one police state with another is hardly an improvement.  Phillip Seymour Hoffman also adds a good performance that complements both Lawrence’s and Moore’s.  This movie is one of the last times we’ll see Hoffman’s face on the big screen.

Moving past the gritty details of character and exposition, there is one element of the on-screen revolutionary warfare that intrigues me.  We get to see several glimpses of oppressed civilians rise up, with or without weapons, and fight the Capital’s “peacekeepers” (jackbooted thug troops clad in white).  In the lumber workers’ IED attack on the peacekeepers and the hydro-engineers’ destruction of the dam, the viewer is looking at guerrilla warfare in action.

Murray Rothbard writes about guerrilla warfare as the most libertarian way to wage a just war for a just cause.  In analyzing the American militia’s tactics and actions at Lexington and Concord, Rothbard says:

“In brief, a guerrilla war would be the libertarian way to fight a war fully consistent with the American revolutionary ideals of liberty and equality of rights, and, therefore, the only way to achieve the libertarian goals of the Revolution.  A European style, orthodox war would be heavily statist, and would inevitably lead to the resumption of the very statism—the taxes, the restrictions, the bureaucracy—which the colonists were waging the revolution to escape.

“What is more, guerrilla war would be enormously more effective; for that is the way any subjugated people—not only libertarians—can fight against a better-armed, but hated foe.  The efficiency of guerrilla fighting as against European warfare had not only been demonstrated in the unbroken victories of Ethan Allen and the Green Mountain Boys in the Vermont revolution, but also in the victory at Concord, a guerrilla engagement so individualistic as to be almost completely leaderless.  In contrast stood the slaughter at Lexington, where the Americans had fought in fixed ranks and in the open.”

Slaughter is definitely a recurring theme in the Hunger Games Saga, no less in Mockingjay Part 1.  This is a reminder that few revolutions are bloodless, and like the American war of independence was no tea party for the American revolutionaries, it will be no walk in the park for Panem’s rebel army.  We see revolutionaries and rebel guerrillas gunned down by the dozens, yet they keep coming until they overpower the peacekeepers.

Sometimes, the only way an oppressed people can overcome a better-armed minority is to use their strength in numbers in a guerrilla war.  History showed us this when the American militia pushed the British out of Concord and besieged Boston, when the Red Army pushed the Germans back west and besieged Berlin, and in modern days as the Kurdish guerrillas continue to press against the Islamic State psychopaths, using hardly more than single-shot rifles.

Despite being a giant appetizer for Part 2—the real Mockingjay film—Part 1 is still a dynamite flick and certainly raises a high standard for Part 2 when it debuts in November 2015.

* * *

Mockingjay Part 1 art is the property of Lionsgate films and other respective owners and stakeholders, used here according to Fair Use laws for the promotion of the movie.  Fan-made movie poster by Kim-Beurre-Lait, courtesy of Mockingjay.net.

Libertarian Star Wars images

For a while now I've been a big stickler on libertarian culture. Bridging the gap between libertarian ideas and mainstream culture is a key way to grow the liberty movement.

Doing so was my objective in making these hi-resolution libertarian e-posters featuring stunning Star Wars artwork and quotes from famous libertarians, including Ludwig von Mises, Murray Rothbard, and Ron Paul.

Just so you know, I did not create these beautiful images. I also do not own or possess the rights to them.  I simply found them on various Google image searches and put text on them.

Despite the libertarian opposition to intellectual property, we still don't want to get sued, so... You may use these libertarian Star Wars e-posters strictly for non-commercial purposes (i.e. no currency exchanged).

Now that that's out of the way, let's share some ideas!

Share these images far and wide!  Re-post!  Re-blog!

May the Force [and God-given liberty] be with you.

Click the images to enlarge

* * *

Star Wars is the property of Lucasfilm Ltd., The Walt Disney Corporation, and Twentieth Century Fox. The potentially copyrighted images were used for free speech and strictly for non-commercial purposes.

Toward a New Liberty: Why We Disagree

Photo by Judd Weiss

Many in the movement have called me a statist, and that pisses me off like you wouldn't believe. (For starters, calling someone inside the movement a statist is childish ad hominem. It's also a great way to get people to agree with you... NOT!

I'm a libertarian through and through, but I operate differently from most of you. Here's how:

Most of you have a brilliant grasp of libertarian theory. You're focused on the finish line. For some, the finish line is a government that obeys the Constitution to the letter; for others, the finish line is full harmonious anarchy.

You see how things ought to be, then you see how things are (police brutality, unjust wars abroad, obscene taxation) and the difference horrifies you.

It's TOO EASY to focus on the finish line and then self-righteously preach about how the police are pigs, how we don't need a standing army, how the state must be done away with, etc. Too easy!

I see the finish line and I want it just as badly as you do. But I also understand that we need to GET THERE first. It won't happen overnight, and we won't get to the libertarian society in one Great Leap Forward. It happens through baby steps.

Yours Truly reading "The Moral Revolution in Atlas Shrugged"

So when I disagree with you, I'm not negating the Rothbardian vision of a new liberty. I'm either making recommendations on the NEXT STEP on the long journey to get there, or I'm telling you to cool it on living in Theory Land and get back to the now, so that you can help me identify ways to get to that new liberty. Remember, simply identifying how things ought to be does NOTHING to change the reality of what's happening now in real time.

We need to consciously and constantly work towards the finish line, inch by inch and yard by yard. We do this by scaling back big government, having honest and productive discussions with those who disagree with us, and supporting market innovations that complement our worldview (i.e. Uber, Bitcoin, the Internet). Sometimes we'll need to make the best of a bad situation if it advances our cause.

The liberty movement NEEDS theorists--engineers--like you to help us keep our eye on the ball, the finish line, so that our movement never loses its soul. But the movement also needs people like me--navigators--to pay attention to "conditions of the road" so that our movement can get there rather than be a pseudo-religion.

* * *

X

Civil War in Mexico (the Mexican drug war)

High school aged kids from Juarez would take part in--and be victim of--massacres that shocked the world.

Mexican Marines operating against paramilitary Los Zetas

Hello, fellow libertarians and aspiring libertarians!

Many of you expressed interest on Facebook and Twitter in my undergrad thesis on the Mexican drug war, which I argue is a multisided civil war and a modern war.  The paper is complete, was submitted two months ago, I presented it at three conferences, and I'm graduating in two weeks.  Hoorah!

I recently polished and expanded the paper (in order for it to be above the quality of Finals Season, i.e., great rush, much caffeine, little sleep). Once I was happy with it, I submitted it for publication and I sure hope they accept it!

In the meantime, I uploaded my unpublished paper as a working paper on Academia.edu.  If you're interested in a 50+ page academic paper on people killing each other in creative ways, then you'll enjoy it. The title is "CIVIL WAR IN MEXICO: Re-Examining Armed Conflict and Criminal Insurgency." You can download the PDF or read it online on my Academia profile.

P.S. I cited Ron Paul and Murray Rothbard as academic sources.  Winning!!!

* * *

Photo by Borderland Bear Reporter Buggs via CC BY-SA 2.5 license. Image obtained from Wikimedia Commons.

Localism: Remedy for Disunity and Recession

I came across the June 2013 issue of The American Conservative features a brief, yet insightful editorial, “Localism’s Green Shoots,” pointing to trends occurring spontaneously across America. Political scientists call this phenomenon localism.  The introductory paragraph acknowledges America’s high unemployment numbers, the wars in Afghanistan and Syria, and civil society’s struggle against the Surveillance State following the revelations by NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden.

The editorial’s main body discusses the impact of those issues here at home: the economy is still in deep recession; more government spending, both at home and abroad, exacerbates the economic situation by inflating the money supply to fund government programs, consequently lowering people’s purchasing power and making it more difficult to save and invest; the War on Terror and unconstitutional surveillance cause the political situation to crumble as more Americans are convinced “government of the people, by the people, and for the people” has perished from the earth.

The editors point to several interesting nationwide trends, first of which is the expansion of farmers’ markets, accompanied by the growth of the “food rights” movement and public opposition to genetically modified foods (GMOs).  I have to agree with those choosing to purchase locally-grown non-GMO foods from farmers’ markets.  Part of this is because I dislike the idea of GMO producers receiving government subsidies[1] to grow food containing hormones and other chemicals harmful through human consumption.  When these companies receive taxpayer money to produce more, larger, unhealthy foods, they’re given an unfair advantage over other producers, especially small and independent farmers.  It remains unseen (in Bastiat’s terminology) that the government chooses winners and creates losers through marketplace interference.

Before I learned about GMO foods, I used to regularly partake in that chemically-altered variety of fruits, vegetables, and processed foods, but now I generally try to avoid GMOs.  My mother has several blooming fruit trees and a comparison of the natural, unadulterated fruits with much larger GMO fruits just plain creeped me out!  The fact that farmers’ markets thrive isn’t due to government intervention in agribusiness, but rather in spite of it.  This trend represents a protest against interventionist policies, not least against those intruding on farming and food production.

Another trend the magazine editors identified is the increased patronization of local, primarily non-corporate small businesses.  I don’t know exactly which of the thousands of consumer industry corporations received Stimulus or TARP funding from the federal government.  What I do know is that, whenever possible, I’ve participated in voting for local farmers and small businesses with my dollars.  In no way is this a revolt against the free market or against mass production of cheaper, more widely available goods and services; instead,  it’s a tiny market signal that yet another consumer has chosen locally produced, higher quality goods and more personable service than one would typically find in a mega-store chain.  It shows a fluctuation of preferences in an arena in which the consumer is theoretically sovereign.

There are cases where locally sold or produced goods are slightly more expensive than those mass produced by large entities.  These cases add credibility to Ludwig von Mises’ subjective theory of value,[2] stating that the value of goods or services is determined not by the amount of labor or production cost, but by the independent value judgment placed on it by individuals.  In my case, the subjective theory explains why I’d prefer to spend 5% or 10% more at the community hardware store than at one of the large department stores.  I find better, speedier service from workers at the community hardware store, and some of those workers are people I know personally.

Another of Mises’ theories that surfaces around localism is that of the necessity of saving money.  He writes in The Anti-Capitalist Mentality,[3] “Capital is not a free gift of God or of nature. It is the outcome of a provident restriction of consumption on the part of man. It is created and increased by saving and maintained by the abstention from dissaving.” If I’m to spend a little more at preferred small businesses, I need to save more by spending less money on other things.  I make subjective value judgments and then purchase whatever goods or services I think I need.

Some market theorists would argue that this brand of localism is a revolt against laissez-faire markets, but the truth is quite the contrary.  Through buying from smaller businesses, I’m feeding their growth with the intended outcome that they’ll one day compete evenly with large chains and influence the battle to mass produce goods and services that are cheaper and better.

The editors also made several allusions to a rebirth of scholarship in conservative ideas at the grass roots level.  These references point not to the big-government conservatism—neoconservatism—that characterized the latest Bush presidency; they refer instead to the paleoconservatism of a bygone era, in which self-styled conservatives—largely libertarian in their ideology—opposed undeclared wars, government intervention in markets, and the federal government overstepping the legal limits to its powers specifically illustrated in the Constitution.  Murray Rothbard elaborates on this topic at length in The Betrayal of the American Right.

The reborn paleoconservative/libertarian ideologies serve as a series of signals in the “marketplace of ideas” (as phrased by John Stuart Mill) that the preferences of “consumers” are shifting in favor of a freer market economy and less government presence in the whole economy and civil society.  Furthermore, localism is giving communities a deeply personal, interactive lesson in economics as human action: people helping people improve society.

---

[1] “Subsidies, GMOs, Obesity.” Rural Migration News, Vol. 10, No. 3. UC Davis. July 2004. <http://migration.ucdavis.edu/rmn/more.php?id=902_0_5_0>

[2] The subjective theory of value is a major theme in Mises’ book Human Action, and adds weight to the thesis that economics isn’t about numbers, theorems, or formulas, but about individual people making choices on spending or acquiring resources.

[3] Von Mises, Ludwig.  The Anti-Capitalistic Mentality, p. 84 via The Quotable Mises, p. 215.