liberty student:there are uncertainties with the state as well. What isn't uncertain (or shouldn't be for a person of conscience) is that using coercion to force other people to act for your benefit is immoral.
True wisdom.
DFB, ruminating on that simple truth, plus perhaps a little grounding in Austrian Economics, is all you really need to take the plunge.
Human Action Comics Issues 1-6
Lilburne: liberty student:there are uncertainties with the state as well. What isn't uncertain (or shouldn't be for a person of conscience) is that using coercion to force other people to act for your benefit is immoral. True wisdom. DFB, ruminating on that simple truth, plus perhaps a little grounding in Austrian Economics, is all you really need to take the plunge.
I honestly have no clue where to start with Austrian Economics. I haven't even taken a basic Economics course at my College.
A lot of the technical jargon in Economics, of whats mostly said on here and in things I read, goes over my head.
Reading your post I was awed at how similarly I came to know Austrian economics and libertarianism as you did. There are levels of understanding that as stated frequintly begine with ron paul. I would agree with some of the others and say that anarcism is more consistant with libertarianism. Minarcism like any statism is a slippery slope. Watch Is limmited goverment an oxymoron ,tom woods from mises is in it, RIP Arron Russo.
Jordan22473: Reading your post I was awed at how similarly I came to know Austrian economics and libertarianism as you did. There are levels of understanding that as stated frequintly begine with ron paul. I would agree with some of the others and say that anarcism is more consistant with libertarianism. Minarcism like any statism is a slippery slope. Watch Is limmited goverment an oxymoron ,tom woods from mises is in it, RIP Arron Russo.
I don't see Aaron Russo talked of much on here.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3-2JDfX_68U
Watch it, amazing watch. Its not about The Federal Reserve as much as it is The IRS. The focus of the movie is a case against The IRS.
Democracy for Breakfast:I honestly have no clue where to start with Austrian Economics.
Hang out, ask thoughtful questions. You'll pick up some basics. Ultimately, you will need to read although the Austrian school is probably the most accessible form of economic thought, because it is not math heavy.
If you find something evil that wobbles, push it. - Gary North
I went through a similar transformation...I was a liberal but noticed the inconsistencies of liberals and conservatives both then I came across the crazy guy named Ron Paul..next thing I know Im reading all about austrian economics. I come across the topic of privatizing all education and it seems absurd to me but a few here on these forums quickly changed my mind..I continued to struggle with the concept of anarchism concerning roads, police, courts, etc and then next thing I know one drunken night I start argueing for the the privatization of roads with all of my conservative friends and yelling at each of them while telling them how big of hypocrites they are for being against private roads but for privatized healthcare...and thats when I realized I had finally been converted (took about 8 months). It trully is the only consistent political philosophy.
I do find it fun to debate anarchism/minarchism but it I find it somewhat pointless considering the stage of statism we are in right now..Once we get to minarchism THEN it will be worth debating. Like I said, I always love to debate the two and its definitely fun but right now were so deep into government it does not really matter.
Re: the OP, the only question is are you for monopoly or are you against monopoly?
Re: learning Austrian Economics, an easy crash course is Irwin Schiff's comics (1st and 2nd links on the page - especially the 2nd one), Lilburne's comics (when they're done), and Tom Woods' YouTube videos. These only require a few minutes/hours. Then I'd read Economics in One Lesson (available in print form here). After that, you'll probably know what to read for further enrichment.
Think outside the monopoly paradigm. Net-based microsecession | Why anarchy hasn't worked
laminustacitus:I am an advocate in gradual institutional change
So was abolitionist William Lloyd Garrison: "Urge immediate abolition as earnestly as we may, it will, alas! be gradual abolition in the end. We have never said that slavery would be overthrown by a single blow; that it ought to be, we shall always contend.”
Remember that the existence of institutions depends on the support of public opinion (Boétie, Hume). So the process of institutional change comprises both the shifting of public opinion and the actual transformation of institutions. The former part will always be gradual; but the latter part can be gradual (e.g. political reformism) or more immediate/total (e.g. secession, seasteading.)
laminustacitus:history has illustrated for us quite clearly that whenever the institutions of society are changed beyond the capability of individuals to know their consequences, and the capabilities of society to work according to the new institutional framework that disaster is not far behind.
Couldn't a case be made that market anarchy is a change within "the capability of individuals to know their consequences"? Moreover, what are the characteristics that distinguish institutional change that is within individual capacity to know consequences (e.g. American Revolution) and change that is beyond it (e.g. Cultural Revolution)?
laminustacitus:The entire "strike the roots" mentality is foolish for, to paraphrase Edmund Burke, only fools would think that society is carte blanche for them to scribble whatever they please.
I think the Burke quote is actually an argument against top-down change and in favor of bottom-up change; both types can be either radical or reformist.
One of the interesting aspects of the seasteading project is the economics of frontiers. As Patri talks about in this talk (around 20 min), the frontier represents a new environment where individuals must adapt and innovate. Since the ocean is a frontier, it is a great opportunity for innovation and competition in social institutions. As Patri puts it, "the frontier was always a classic place where the slate was wiped clean."
LibertarianAnarchy.com - Government is immoral, unnecessary, and doesn't work!
Sage:So was abolitionist William Lloyd Garrison: "Urge immediate abolition as earnestly as we may, it will, alas! be gradual abolition in the end. We have never said that slavery would be overthrown by a single blow; that it ought to be, we shall always contend.”
Lam doesn't believe slavery should be overthrown with a single blow. He has a different perspective on it.
I personally believe I must be as radical as I can be, for if I won't, who else will?
There are plenty of people willing to take baby steps. Who will be waving them on from the horizon, assuring them the path ahead is safe?
I think lam's objection can be answered by the details of whatever form the dissolution of the State takes. If it's by microsecession or gradual building up of panarchist legal associations, the change will be very different than if by some kind of direct overthrow.
DFB, what got me started here was just reading the blog posts, day after day, and thinking about them. Then I went on to the multimedia, such as the half hour / one hour talks. Following that, all the tenets of the philosophy should become more apparent. After you get more comfortable with them through your exposure to these things, you'll start to get the who's who of AE, and you'll read some books by these people.
After a lot of reading and talking, you get to be as good as these guys.
The appeal to "charity" is a truly ironic one. First, it is hardly "charity" to take wealth by force and hand it over to someone else. -Rothbard
liberty student:What isn't uncertain (or shouldn't be for a person of conscience) is that using coercion to force other people to act for your benefit is immoral.
I think you are forgetting your philosophy on ethics or did you have a change of heart?
'It is difficult to imagine any normal person wishing to meet Marx for a third time.' - Alexander Gray, The Socialist Tradition
Democracy for Breakfast: I haven't even taken a basic Economics course at my College.
I haven't even taken a basic Economics course at my College.
Just a word of advice, you really should take 'real' economic courses in order to understand Austrian economics better. Peter Shiff and Ron Paul, though they follow policy advice derived from Austrian economists, are not economists themselves, and do not write truly economic literature. in fact, most popular austrian literature of the past decade is not really economic literature either (i.e. meltdown).
The neo-classical concepts they teach in schools are important because they offer you the opportunity to critically examine them. Same with Keynes. You can't rationally dismiss Keynes if you don't know why he is wrong (appeals to 'common sense' do not apply). It is invalluable to a budding economist to understand the innerworkings of many systems in order to come to their own conclusions.
Sage: I think the Burke quote is actually an argument against top-down change and in favor of bottom-up change; both types can be either radical or reformist.
Have you read 'Reflections on the Revolution in France'? In it he applies the same concept to both top-down and bottom-up reforms.
troutndeer:However, it is not difficult to see that if violence, theft or imprisonment was not a consequence of such vile activities, then many more people would commit them.
You don't think there would be consequences without the government?
At most, 5% of the population would need to stop complying to bring down the government.
Laughing Man:I think you are forgetting your philosophy on ethics or did you have a change of heart?
February 17 - 1600 - Giordano Bruno is burnt alive by the catholic church. Aquinas : "much more reason is there for heretics, as soon as they are convicted of heresy, to be not only excommunicated but even put to death."
Juan:LM, don't expect consistency from demagogues.
The irony is enticing. From now on, I will refer to all forum members here as demagogues, because after all, we are all out to get one another in an effort to get the most Mises Points.
WARNING: This signature violates Rule 5. Stay classy!
So If we do have anarchism, would the security/justice companies not decide what is coercion and what is not? Or rather, would in not be the consumers of security/justice companies voting with their dollars deciding what is coercion? Is that not the same as Mob Rule?
Ludwig von Mises Institute | 518 West Magnolia Avenue | Auburn, Alabama 36832-4528
Phone: 334.321.2100 · Fax: 334.321.2119
contact@Mises.org | webmaster | AOL-IM MainMises
Mises.org sitemap