Tag: Liberty

  • Still Oklahoma’s most wanted

    A Wall Street Journal editorial explains the recent development in the case of Paul Jacob and two others in Oklahoma. This case is of interest for a few reasons.

    First, I know and like Paul Jacob. He’s been at the forefront of the fight for term limits. The Oklahoma case stems from his advocacy of initiative and referendum, something we don’t have in Kansas.

    Second, this case illustrates how government officials, in this case the attorney general of Oklahoma, can misuse their office and power for political gain. We in Kansas can only hope that our good neighbors to our south see through Drew Edmondson’s actions and refuse to elect him to any office.

    Paul Jacob is president of Citizens in Charge. His commentary is found at Common Sense with Paul Jacob and Townhall.

    The Journal editorial is Still Oklahoma’s Most Wanted.

  • AFP Defending the American Dream Summit to be Held in Wichita

    Americans For Prosperity — Kansas announces Kansas’ second statewide Defending the American Dream Summit. This event will be on Saturday, January 10 from 9 a.m. To 2 p.m. at the Beech Activity Center in Wichita.

    The featured speaker is Jonah Goldberg of National Review Online. He’s also author of the recent best-seller Liberal Fascism: The Secret History of the American Left, From Mussolini to the Politics of Meaning.

    Registration is only $29 until December 31st and includes breakfast, lunch, and admission to the general session of speakers.

    I’ve been to several AFP statewide summits in Kansas and Texas, and the national summit in Washington. AFP always puts on a great event, and I urge you to register early and attend. Click here for more information and to register.

  • I, Pencil turns 50!

    The Foundation for Economic Education has a new version of I, Pencil to celebrate its 50th anniversary. Click here to view the announcement and read this short book.

    I’ve written about I, Pencil in the past.

    I, Pencil is one of the most important and influential writings that explain the necessity for limited government. A simple object that we may not give much thought to, the story of the pencil illustrates the importance of markets and the impossibility of centralized economic planning.

    The size and scope of government, both at the national and local level, has been growing. Now our country is entering a period where the possibility of even larger and more intrusive government, growing faster than it has been, is very real. Those who love liberty must keep principles like those illuminated in I, Pencil at the forefront of debate.

  • Walter Block on Economics in One Lesson

    Walter Block talks about Economics in One Lesson, perhaps the most approachable book about economics. And, it’s a free-market, liberty-friendly, Austrian approach. What could be better?

    In this video, Professor Block is interviewed by Jeffrey Tucker at the Ludwig von Mises Institute.

  • Introducing Economics in One Lesson

    In This Book is So Me, Walter Block introduces a book that I’ve quoted from and used extensively: Economics in One Lesson by Henry Hazlitt.

    Every widespread economic fallacy embraced by pundits, politicians, editorialists, clergy, academics is given the back of the hand they so richly deserve by this author: that public works promote economic welfare, that unions and union-inspired minimum-wage laws actually raise wages, that free trade creates unemployment, that rent control helps house the poor, that saving hurts the economy, that profits exploit the poverty stricken; the list goes on and on. Exhilarating.

    No one who digests this book will ever be the same when it comes to public-policy analysis.

    This book is available online at the Foundation for Economic Education, and portions are available in audio format at Economics in One Lesson (Audio) Part 1 and Economics in One Lesson (Audio) Part 2.

  • Toward a Free America

    As our country works its way through a period of turmoil, we must remember that there is another way than what those on the left and right propose. That way, the way of liberty, is the subject of For A New Liberty: The Libertarian Manifesto, by Murray N. Rothbard. (The book is available to read online in pdf format here.)

    From the book’s description at the Ludwig von Mises Institute: “In For A New Liberty: The Libertarian Manifesto, Rothbard proposes a once-and-for-all escape from the two major political parties, the ideologies they embrace, and their central plans for using state power against people. Libertarianism is Rothbard’s radical alternative that says state power is unworkable and immoral and ought to be curbed and finally overthrown. To make his case, Rothbard deploys his entire system of thought: natural law, natural rights, Austrian economics, American history, the theory of the state, and more.”

    Here’s the final passage from this outstanding book:

    Toward a Free America

    The libertarian creed, finally, offers the fulfillment of the best of the American past along with the promise of a far better future. Even more than conservatives, who are often attached to the monarchical traditions of a happily obsolete European past, libertarians are squarely in the great classical liberal tradition that built the United States and bestowed on us the American heritage of individual liberty, a peaceful foreign policy, minimal government, and a free-market economy. Libertarians are the only genuine current heirs of Jefferson, Paine, Jackson, and the abolitionists.

    And yet, while we are more truly traditional and more rootedly American than the conservatives, we are in some ways more radical than the radicals. Not in the sense that we have either the desire or the hope of remoulding human nature by the path of politics; but in the sense that only we provide the really sharp and genuine break with the encroaching statism of the twentieth century. The Old Left wants only more of what we are suffering from now; the New Left, in the last analysis, proposes only still more aggravated statism or compulsory egalitarianism and uniformity. Libertarianism is the logical culmination of the now forgotten “Old Right” (of the 1930s and ‘40s) opposition to the New Deal, war, centralization, and State intervention. Only we wish to break with all aspects of the liberal State: with its welfare and its warfare, its monopoly privileges and its egalitarianism, its repression of victimless crimes whether personal or economic. Only we offer technology without technocracy, growth without pollution, liberty without chaos, law without tyranny, the defense of property rights in one’s person and in one’s material possessions.

    Strands and remnants of libertarian doctrines are, indeed, all around us, in large parts of our glorious past and in values and ideas in the confused present. But only libertarianism takes these strands and remnants and integrates them into a mighty, logical, and consistent system. The enormous success of Karl Marx and Marxism has been due not to the validity of his ideas — all of which, indeed, are fallacious — but to the fact that he dared to weave socialist theory into a mighty system. Liberty cannot succeed without an equivalent and contrasting systematic theory; and until the last few years, despite our great heritage of economic and political thought and practice, we have not had a fully integrated and consistent theory of liberty. We now have that systematic theory; we come, fully armed with our knowledge, prepared to bring our message and to capture the imagination of all groups and strands in the population. All other theories and systems have clearly failed: socialism is in retreat everywhere, and notably in Eastern Europe; liberalism has bogged us down in a host of insoluble problems; conservatism has nothing to offer but sterile defense of the status quo. Liberty has never been fully tried in the modern world; libertarians now propose to fulfill the American dream and the world dream of liberty and prosperity for all mankind.

  • Bryan Derreberry and the Chamber’s goals for Wichita

    When the head of a chamber of commerce speaks or writes, it pays to listen or read carefully. While chambers are nominally pro-business, that’s a long way from saying they’re pro-liberty. Instead, they increasingly exist to serve a narrow interest. Using words and language like “pride,” “community,” “investment,” and “economic development” — all words that people can agree with, their flowery messages hide their real agenda.

    Here’s an example. In the Wichita Eagle on May 12, 2006, president and CEO of the Wichita Metro Chamber of Commerce Bryan Derreberry wrote as follows:

    If we are serious about advancing our community, then we have to invest in it and take pride in who we are. The Sedgwick County arena can boost excitement and economic development in Wichita, Sedgwick County and the region.

    The arena initiative was a broad-based decision-making effort that offered everyone an opportunity to weigh in with a vote. Sedgwick County is now carrying out what the voters approved with an open and thoughtful process, allowing much input along the way.

    There will always be those who resist change and look for ways to impede progress. But we have an obligation to take care of the community we live in today and make it better for those who come after us.

    First, Mr. Derreberry is confused about the meaning of the word “investment.” In a recent article, Chris Brown tells us the true meaning of investment: “Investment signifies an accumulation of savings through lower present consumption, which will then be used to achieve (potential) profitable returns in the future.” None of this applies to the downtown Wichita arena. It was funded by transferring money from taxpayers to the government. Then, government has no ability to measure profitability, as it is not subject to the profit and loss system that private business must live by. Besides, how does government generate revenue? Through taxation, of course.

    Then, the “broad-based decision-making effort” is certainly a misnomer. The arena passed with 52% of the vote. That’s hardly a mandate. Many people, seeing how the process has been handled since the election, have said they’d change their “yes” vote to “no.”

    Finally, Mr. Derreberry slams those who say “no” to what he wants. That’s a mistake arising from the arrogance of those who believe that they know best how people should spend their money. By saying “no” to these government projects we are saying “yes” to entrepreneurship, limited government, and liberty. These goals, evidently, are not valued by Mr. Derreberry and his organization.

  • Top 100 libertarian blogs. I’m in.

    Sarah Scrafford has produced a very useful list: The Top 100 Libertarian Blogs. I’m happy to report that my blog, The Voice For Liberty in Wichita, made the cut.

    This list is divided into categories, which should make it easier to find just the right blog for your interests.

    Thank you to Sarah Scrafford and Kelly Sonora for this useful service.