Free Markets, Free Minds, Free Me.

The current Republican Party establishment has just proved their fascism during the RNC. While their rhetoric may seem to support limited government, individual responsibility, and "democracy" their actions during the convention prove otherwise.

From the New Oxford Dictionary: "Fascism tends to include a belief in the supremacy of one national or ethnic group, a contempt for democracy, an insistence on obedience to a powerful leader, and a strong demagogic approach."

Supremacy of one national group
How many "Country First" signs did you see? The signs engulfed the whole convention.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-09-04-country-first_N.htm

A contempt for democracy
I am still awestricken by the RNC passing a motion to make a non-unanimous vote unanimous. I conjecture the motion was made to show unity behind a single candidate namely McCain. Combine that with not even counting votes correctly. But that just proves the contempt for democratic votes.
http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/022653.html

An insistence on obedience to a powerful leader
Dissent was not tolerated. Opposing opinions were shut off from being heard. Ron Paul supporters were cut off at the mic. Not only that, but their signs and pamphlets were confiscated.
http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/022689.html

A strong demagogic approach
A demagoguge takes what is popular, and uses the popularity rather than rational arguement. Take another a look at McCain's NEW campaign slogan, Country First: Reform, Prosperity, Peace. The word change is all the rage these days thanks to Obama. Reform comes via Obama's popular Change message. Prosperity, of course we want to be prosperious, but does McCain's platform actually yield prosperity? For who? The war in Iraq has become wildly unpopular, hence the term Peace.
http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2008/06/17/politics/horserace/entry4186578.shtml

This is not to say that ALL Republicans are fascist, just that the leadership of the organization appear to hold to the definiation of fascism. Which, IMHO, is still a pretty big deal.

RNC: Making a non-unanimous vote unanimous

2008-09-04T10:50:00Z

The RNC vote for the presidentially nominee was appalling. John McCain received 2000+, Ron Paul 11 votes, Romney 2 votes. The roll call counted the vote as Ron Paul 5 votes, Romney 2 votes. But at the very end, their was a motion made to make the non-unanimous vote unanimous. The motion passed! What's the point of voting if, at the very end a motion can be made to change the votes? They just broke their very own RNC rules and an "republican" morals.

UPDATE: After writing this, I stumbled upon Lew Rockwell's article, http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/022653.html, of the same topic. He actually counted the Ron Paul vote at 15!

Mont Pelerin and The Property and Freedom Socities

2008-07-06T02:55:43Z

Mises.org spearheaded by the Mises Institute has been instrumental in my intellectual growth. I wondered, were there any other organizations (as opposed to just websites/webcontent) with the similar scope of the Mises Institute on Free Markets, Austrian Economics, and libertarianism. I stumbled upon the Mont Pelerin Society, founded by Austrian Economist F.A. Hayek. Hayek appears highly regarded at the Mises Institute, naturally I thought there would be some sort of connection between the Mises Institute and the organization he founded, the Mont Pelerin Society.

I posted a question to the Mises forum, which provided information as to the history of Mont Pelerin Society, but not necessarily the current status of the organization. The organization seems alive and well, and will be having there 60th Anniversary Meeting later this year. However, I was a bit baffled that the Mont Pelerin Society website did not list a link to the Mises Institute, yet listed other libertarian (various flavors) oriented organizations, . Is the Mises Institute too extreme in there views? Did the Mont Pelerin Society diverge from the original intentions of F.A. Hayek? Have a look at the list of speakers, or the individuals that run the organization. Many are libertarian minded, but I do not recognize any Austrian School names (perhaps you know of some.)

Anyhow, a few days later, I was stumbled upon Hoppe's website, and noticed an interesting link. Similar to F.A. Hayek about 60 years ago, in 2006, Hoppe, and other Austrian Scholars, founded a new organization, The Property and Freedom Society. Could this be a revival or perhaps a continuance of what F.A. Hayek envisioned? Or does it take Free Markets and libertarianism one step further?

Austrian Economic Dilettante

2008-07-04T03:36:25Z

First blog post. I am a toddler when it comes to Austrian Economics and libertarianism. I personally considered myself aligned with the liberal (in the American sense). I was never officially part of the democrats or greens or any other party. I couldn't bring myself to be part of any party. I found libertarianism fascinating, but I couldn't get over the libertarian stance on public education, universal health care, and private almost everything. After reading the arguments of both sides, and hearing Ron Paul speak for the first time during the presidential primaries, it appears the libertarian position not only more logical, but more freedom oriented than the other positions. I am happy to have found a home here at Mises.