Alone on an island, one has no choice but to be libertarian; self-sovereignty is the only kind there is.
The question of where rights come from is answered definitively, as our island dweller is endowed with a complete set of natural rights even though there is no one else to grant them. Freedom is complete, and the self-owned islander who produces in surplus can not possibly be considered greedy, heartless, selfish, or evil for his extraordinary productivity.
It is only when a second person arrives on the island who demands to live off the surplus of the first that the libertarian’s self-sufficiency is suddenly called selfishness. The irony of envy is that greed is always assigned by the demander, and selfishness is the accusation hurled by those who insist their own needs must be tended at the expense of others.
When a third person arrives on the island armed with laws and guns and chains, he taxes the property of the first to give to the second under terms imposed by force of law and the threat of imprisonment at gunpoint. We call him government.
The amount to be confiscated from the first is determined by vote of all three. This is what democracy looks like. The admonition “no man is an island” is most urgently advocated by that third guy on it, the one whose livelihood depends on convincing the second guy he cannot survive without the looting of the first.
The island of three – one to produce, one to depend, and one to regulate - is the prism by which both our modern-day Republicans and Democrats view the world. They fuss over who gets to be the third guy on the island, differing only in how much they will take and what they reward and punish with the takings.
Neither abides by the Constitution they have sworn to defend, and both use the law as a weapon against the people. Both embrace a crony corporatism that defeats free market capitalism’s liberation of the human spirit.
Dependence is an unnatural state. It is created by excessive government and perpetuated by the continued expansion of government power. America has been turned into a nation where that first person on the island is vilified, the second is canonized, and the third is revered. That is the twisted morality we call progressive.
A libertarian Island of Three would be different; all would be self-sufficient, self-owned, and self-governed equals. Our vision for America is not just three, but three hundred million free first persons, to whom dependence is a temporary and episodic condition.
We would prefer a government small enough to exist unseen; with laws few enough that we could actually know them and abide by them. Anarchy can also be millions of laws and regulations so complex that none of us could possibly be law-abiding.
We believe that markets regulate better then men; not because we read it somewhere, but because we have lived with our eyes open. We believe that government is necessary only to protect individual rights; not to herd people into groups to be collectively gifted or punished by force. We believe that freedom is the natural state of mankind; that volition is what is meant by the “image of God”. Many conservatives share our vision of America; many more say that they do.
Government and Liberty are two opposite destinations; it is not possible to seek one without leaving the other behind. Libertarians and liberals divide over which way to go; libertarians and conservatives divide over the length of the journey. We are about to begin the New Year 2012, a year when critical elections will decide both direction and length of the journey we will take as a nation.
Be informed, be involved, and be invested in liberty. Choose your island.
“Moment Of Clarity” is a weekly commentary by Libertarian writer and speaker Tim Nerenz, Ph.D. Visit Tim’s website www.timnerenz.com to find your moment.
The question of where rights come from is answered definitively, as our island dweller is endowed with a complete set of natural rights even though there is no one else to grant them. Freedom is complete, and the self-owned islander who produces in surplus can not possibly be considered greedy, heartless, selfish, or evil for his extraordinary productivity.
It is only when a second person arrives on the island who demands to live off the surplus of the first that the libertarian’s self-sufficiency is suddenly called selfishness. The irony of envy is that greed is always assigned by the demander, and selfishness is the accusation hurled by those who insist their own needs must be tended at the expense of others.
When a third person arrives on the island armed with laws and guns and chains, he taxes the property of the first to give to the second under terms imposed by force of law and the threat of imprisonment at gunpoint. We call him government.
The amount to be confiscated from the first is determined by vote of all three. This is what democracy looks like. The admonition “no man is an island” is most urgently advocated by that third guy on it, the one whose livelihood depends on convincing the second guy he cannot survive without the looting of the first.
The island of three – one to produce, one to depend, and one to regulate - is the prism by which both our modern-day Republicans and Democrats view the world. They fuss over who gets to be the third guy on the island, differing only in how much they will take and what they reward and punish with the takings.
Neither abides by the Constitution they have sworn to defend, and both use the law as a weapon against the people. Both embrace a crony corporatism that defeats free market capitalism’s liberation of the human spirit.
Dependence is an unnatural state. It is created by excessive government and perpetuated by the continued expansion of government power. America has been turned into a nation where that first person on the island is vilified, the second is canonized, and the third is revered. That is the twisted morality we call progressive.
A libertarian Island of Three would be different; all would be self-sufficient, self-owned, and self-governed equals. Our vision for America is not just three, but three hundred million free first persons, to whom dependence is a temporary and episodic condition.
We would prefer a government small enough to exist unseen; with laws few enough that we could actually know them and abide by them. Anarchy can also be millions of laws and regulations so complex that none of us could possibly be law-abiding.
We believe that markets regulate better then men; not because we read it somewhere, but because we have lived with our eyes open. We believe that government is necessary only to protect individual rights; not to herd people into groups to be collectively gifted or punished by force. We believe that freedom is the natural state of mankind; that volition is what is meant by the “image of God”. Many conservatives share our vision of America; many more say that they do.
Government and Liberty are two opposite destinations; it is not possible to seek one without leaving the other behind. Libertarians and liberals divide over which way to go; libertarians and conservatives divide over the length of the journey. We are about to begin the New Year 2012, a year when critical elections will decide both direction and length of the journey we will take as a nation.
Be informed, be involved, and be invested in liberty. Choose your island.
“Moment Of Clarity” is a weekly commentary by Libertarian writer and speaker Tim Nerenz, Ph.D. Visit Tim’s website www.timnerenz.com to find your moment.
12 comments:
Fantastic analogy. You just made my day.
Number 3 collects enough so to give some to Number 1 and Number 2. This makes Number 1 and Number 2 dependent on Number 3.
Good read... I don't read many blogs... I make it a a point to read yours.
Tim, Thanks! I will share this with friends!
Ahh yes, the "I got mine, screw my fellow man" philosophy.
Individualism is great, and in some instances commendable. However, there is one great flaw in your philosophy.
You live as part of the American society.
By doing so, you become part and parcel to the social contract that makes up this society. You obtain a number of benefits by living in this society and, as such, are expected to contribute to this society.
Libertarians, however, want to continue to reap the benefits of living in the society, yet don't feel the need to contribute under the guise of "liberty".
No, that's theft.
Benefiting from everything the US has to offer, from interstates/roads, schools/universities, police/fire/military, businesses, the power grid, etc., without wanting to contribute makes libertarians into freeloaders.
In conclusion, feel free to found your own sovereign state, completely unencumbered by the laws, benefits and services that come with being a US citizen.
That way you can be completely self-sufficient with a government small enough to "exit unseen".
Mr. Salafia, libertarians aren't opposed to taxes- but that was a great straw man to build and then tear down (albeit, devoid of fact).
Libertarians oppose the taxing of one in order to support another- not the taxing of all to benefit the collective.
If all 3 on the island were "first citizens" then each would support themselves. If a member fell on tough times, the other two would assist him, of their own freewill, because they value his contribution. If he were to break his legs, as an example, then the other two might completely subsidize him during recovery because they could depend on his continued contribution upon his return to health. But if he were to simply refuse to work, then he would starve.
I choose to pay for what I value- roads and military included. I give to charity because I choose to help some. The government over taxes to pay for that which brings no value apart from allegiance to the government.
No more straw men, please.
Christian, it is not "I got mine", it is "I earned mine, and you earned yours and I have no claim over yours that is superior to your own". Nobody screws anybody when we all act of our own volition, and no libertarian I know objects to supporting Constitutionally-limited government and the services that it provides, like the ones you list. What I object to is having my earnings confiscated and transferred to millionaire executives at Solyndra or Fannie Mae or given to people who choose not to support themselves even though they are fully capable, or to foreign dictators. Don't you?
Read www.TheSocietyProject.org for the concrete steps needed to Reverse the change in our government from a Constitutionally limited government to an authoritarian Socialist Democracy (rule by mob majority)that funds itself totally by theft of wealth and property which it redistributes to buy votes.
UVA,
The libertarian position on taxes is to either cut or eliminate them, especially the income tax. In fact, Ron Paul, darling of the libertarian movement, says on his campaign's website that he'd eliminate the income estate, and capital gains taxes along with closing the IRS. In addition, the libertarian website, along with other references on the web, all advocate similar things. So to say that "libertarians aren't opposed to taxes" is intellectually dishonest.
In your example of the guy with broken legs, the injured man's rights to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness are being defined by the other two men's opinion of whether or not the injured man's contribution to the island is of enough value to them in order to help him out.
The other side of that coin is that if the injured man's value isn't high enough to the other two then, well, tough luck buddy, maybe you'll walk again someday.
What that view neglects is investing in things that help to promote and maintain the health of the citizenry are actually much lower cost over the long run than the cost of things like long term care, lost productivity, etc. Costs incurred by the short-sighted and selfish view of libertarianism.
Libertarianism has never and can never work in governing a nation because it runs completely counter to human nature.
Without federal intervention we wouldn't have things like child labor laws, worker safety rules, environmental protections, clean air and clean water rules, not to mention the myriad of things that came out of that government financed boondoggle known as the space program.
We'd still have segregated lunch counters and women and minorities would not have the right to vote.
All of the things were opposed by those who thought the federal government was too powerful and all those issues should be left to the states.
There are only two outcomes for a libertarian government:
1) A nation like Chile under Pinochet
2) Feudalism
Christian, you fail to understand that by working and trading in a society, individuals do, in fact, contribute to it. Taxes are not the only means by which we enrich society. The modern US income tax was first imposed in 1913 (with bracket rates from 1%-7%(!!!)). Reconcile this with the fact that the greatest period of economic growth in the history of this country (aka the Gilded Age) occurred in the 1800s.
And perhaps you are the one who is being intellectually dishonest in saying libertarians are opposed to all taxes? We merely oppose how high taxes have become, courtesy of New-Dealing, Guns-and-Butter-promising politicians on both sides of the isle. There is a role for government, and there is a document which defines the role. I don't recall any mention of a government imposed 'social contract' in this document, so please don't pretend that such a notion is a long-standing part of our American heritage. In fact, look to FDR, the original social-contracter, and his utter distain for The Constitution and its separation of powers with his attempt to undermine our Supreme Court through court packing (The Judiciary Reorganization Bill of 1937). There's Progressive virtues on display for you.
You want to talk about Pinochet? FDR is the closest we've come to a dictator. The guy served how many terms? And google 'voice from the sewers' if you'd like to read how he weaseled his way into his party's nomination in 1940. History records way more dictators on the statist side than libertarian, since libertarian dictator is an oxymoron.
Christian Salafia, if you look at history, you will find it was largely because of Democrats that segregated our military especially under President Wilson. Our military actually was unsegregated for 50 years until dictator type democrats come along. Also It was democrats again who took the rights of women to vote away. Several years after this country was created, democratic party back then known as the wig party sneaked a bill in with other legislation because Women always tended to vote the other party and democrats just like all great dictators cannot stand minorities or women who stand in their way.
Post a Comment