Edmund Burke was born in Dublin on this day--January 12--some 273 years ago. He is often called the father of conservatism, but the central passion throughout his writings and speeches is opposition to arbitrary power, especially in the hands of the government, with its "officious, universal interference" in people's lives.
In its original meaning, "crisis" signifies a turning point that can either lead to improvement and recovery or to more severe deterioration. In the case of Argentina, with the future of the Argentinean people in mind, one must hope for the abandonment of its interventionist economic system, with its reliance on a bureaucratic apparatus and its self-chosen dependency on foreign credits.
After laboring mightily and giving birth to the 2001-2002 federal budget, politicians returned home for the holidays, where they spent much of their time emphasizing their role in bringing home the bacon to those local interests who benefit. But as Congress returns to "the work of the people" in a midterm election year, it is worth remembering that not one cent of the funding came from anyone except taxpayers.
The energy problems that plague this country are government created. From restrictions on drilling to U.S. foreign policy blunders, the government has been a veritable "bull in a china shop" when it comes to energy policy. Another layer of political action, even when suggested by "free-market economists," will not solve our problems.
In the post-attack world, in which politicians attempt to impose the national security state at home and wage war abroad, a simple point has been obscured: it all started with a multiple hijacking. The theft of the planes was made possible not with grenades or heavy explosives but with box cutters––the most dangerous weapon on board. If the hijackers had been stopped or even deterred by armed pilots, the twin towers would still be standing, and there would be no war or government power grabs (at least not more than the usual).
The controversy is as old as the Great Society. So why bring up the fluoridation question again? Well, my county in Florida just voted to fluoridate the water supply. Actually, the government officials in my county who are responsible for such things voted for it—neither I nor my neighbors were ever asked to vote on anything.
But rather than being the substance of a conspiracy theory, as is usually claimed, the question of fluoridation is a question of the proper role of government (federal, state, or local) in society.
Now that the economy is in a slump, many of the workers who gave up their welfare benefits are finding themselves without a job. Many of the industries that were most likely to hire former welfare recipients have been those worst affected by the recession. These workers are finding that they have no legal right to a resumption of welfare payments because the disgraceful Aid to Families with Dependent Children program was abolished.
The fact that Carlo Ponzi's investment scheme lasted less than a year--while the government's "Ponzi scheme" has lasted, through good times and bad, for more than half a century--only suggests that Ponzi should have applied his talents as a politician, where he could've fleeced his victims legally.
Contrary to expectations, the historic transition from absolute monarchies to democratic states did not represent a leap forward for liberty. The popular vote in the twentieth century, and the centralization of power it has generated, has been the fountainhead of democratic, international, and national socialism. Hans Hoppe introduces his new book.
The brutal punishing of adults for the substances they ought to be able to ingest, inhale, or inject at their own peril is based on a parochial and moribund prior restraint argument. Considering the extent and severity of its assault on otherwise peaceable people, the state's conduct in the war on drugs befits the conduct of a criminal class, albeit a criminal class that enjoys the protection of the law.
