.
.
.
.
The Alliance of Intellectuals and the State
Modern professional intellectuals in general, and especially those employed in tax-funded schools, are begotten to the state apparatus because it is the source of their income. Even in so-called private universities, the curricula are still determined by the state through various directives so that change and innovation are sacrificed. Your professors might not explicitly advocate left-statism, but indoctrination is never overt. Modern sociology for example, promotes a class division in society by slicing and dicing it into many warring factions. For them, there is always one class exploiting the other. Men are exploiting women, whites exploiting blacks, rich exploiting poor, Christians exploiting Muslims. In doing this they serve to perpetuate the class division that they sought to erase. A foremost Filipino historian once wrote that historians are, by default, marxists with a small ‘m’. Without a philosophy grounded in reality and knowledge in sound (Austrian) economics, historians tend to draw interpretations out of the air because they do not have the proper methodology to identify real cause-effect relationships. I am not saying their facts are wrong, but only the interpretation. In a free market, competition in the provision of education will promote change and improvement, intellectuals will have to keep up to new ideas lest their human capital go down, and hence their wages. In a free market, wages of intellectuals are determined just like wages for computer engineers and construction workers, on the basis of merit. In a statist school system, career success of intellectuals depends on how close you are to the state. Survival means you have to accept statist premises. Since justifying government depredations into our everyday life is easier than open debate and intellectual change, intellectuals naturally ally with the state.
Calculation Problem Applied to Tax-funded Education
Even if the government were filled with angels, government would still create shortages and dismal quality of services. The problem with government is not intellectual, it is not psychological, it is not the character of government officials, the problem with government is economic calculation.
Government can put children into classrooms, arrange a curricula, hire teachers, build school structures, fix number of hours for schooling, make students answers tests and read textbooks. All those the government can do. What the government cannot do is educate. Let me explain. First of all, today’s school curricula and teaching methods are decided on by the arbitrary whims of the bureaucrat. No matter how intelligent and experienced the bureaucrat is, he does not have an objective basis for his decision making. He can never know what tens of millions of unique Filipinos really want and need. How can tens of millions of Filipinos’ valuations be aggregated and be made useful? Only through the price mechanism. Price is the objective expression of countless peoples’ subjective valuations. The only way to make sure school curricula and teaching methods correspond to what skills Filipinos really need is through the market process itself. Free market education is superior to government education because free market education systems are coordinated by the price mechanism. This is opposed to education wherein FEW bureaucrats decide. The difference is between the knowledge of millions of education consumers and the knowledge of few pompous bureaucrats.
Saturday, September 4, 2010
My Defense of Capitalism Against A Red
Let's start with the definition of free market. Free market just means a system wherein people voluntarily exchange their own goods in the absence of (state) coercion. For this to happen, there has to be acknowledged private property rights.
So from the above definition there cannot possibly be anything wrong with a free market because there is nothing wrong with voluntarily supplying and exchanging goods. In contrast to this natural social order of capitalism that needs no enforcement, socialism which is broadly defined by forced redistribution of property titles needs physical force of the state to succeed. This clearly violates natural law and therefore is immoral. The real problem is your view of the free market. You think it's about corporations exploiting laborers, ravaging the earth, and causing mass social inequality and poverty when in fact what we have is a neoliberal fascistic system.
Let's now go on to the monopoly problem. A firm gains profit and grows in a free market by giving value to the consumer. So if a firm grows very large, it just means it is successful in giving value to the consumer(and as a corollary employed lots of people and given high wages). So no one should really worry about corporate growth in a free market.
Monopolies by definition cannot exist in a free market because the free market by definition is characterized by free entry in the production of goods in addition to the fact that nobody is talented enough to have all the market share. Some anomalies to this are DeBeer and the New York Stock Exchange but the NYSE now takes government assistance. Monopolies can only exist because of government special privileges and corporate welfare and subsidies and most especially anti-trust laws. If you take a look at the anti-trust cases in America, it will be very clear to you that large firms are the ones that usually file them against their younger, smaller competitors. This is what creates a monopoly. US agribusiness like Monsanto receive 40% of their income through government subsidies. When you think about it and start from first principles and then integrate all the facts there is no doubt that what we have is NOT a free market.
Lastly, you said that monopolies would emerge because of mercenary recruitment and training of private armies. Go back to the definition of free market. It's a system where force is absent. So if a corporation hires a private army to attack its competitors, that is exactly the antithesis of a free market. In contrast, government itself functions entirely by means of force through taxation. Government defined as a territorial monopolist of law, order and ultimate decision making is the ULTIMATE PRIVATE ARMY and MONOPOLY!
So from the above definition there cannot possibly be anything wrong with a free market because there is nothing wrong with voluntarily supplying and exchanging goods. In contrast to this natural social order of capitalism that needs no enforcement, socialism which is broadly defined by forced redistribution of property titles needs physical force of the state to succeed. This clearly violates natural law and therefore is immoral. The real problem is your view of the free market. You think it's about corporations exploiting laborers, ravaging the earth, and causing mass social inequality and poverty when in fact what we have is a neoliberal fascistic system.
Let's now go on to the monopoly problem. A firm gains profit and grows in a free market by giving value to the consumer. So if a firm grows very large, it just means it is successful in giving value to the consumer(and as a corollary employed lots of people and given high wages). So no one should really worry about corporate growth in a free market.
Monopolies by definition cannot exist in a free market because the free market by definition is characterized by free entry in the production of goods in addition to the fact that nobody is talented enough to have all the market share. Some anomalies to this are DeBeer and the New York Stock Exchange but the NYSE now takes government assistance. Monopolies can only exist because of government special privileges and corporate welfare and subsidies and most especially anti-trust laws. If you take a look at the anti-trust cases in America, it will be very clear to you that large firms are the ones that usually file them against their younger, smaller competitors. This is what creates a monopoly. US agribusiness like Monsanto receive 40% of their income through government subsidies. When you think about it and start from first principles and then integrate all the facts there is no doubt that what we have is NOT a free market.
Lastly, you said that monopolies would emerge because of mercenary recruitment and training of private armies. Go back to the definition of free market. It's a system where force is absent. So if a corporation hires a private army to attack its competitors, that is exactly the antithesis of a free market. In contrast, government itself functions entirely by means of force through taxation. Government defined as a territorial monopolist of law, order and ultimate decision making is the ULTIMATE PRIVATE ARMY and MONOPOLY!
Thursday, August 26, 2010
Leftist Politics and Hacienda Luisita
Recently there have been talks of a compromise deal between the peasants and the legal owners of Hacienda Lusita. As it turns out, the peasants prefer stock distribution options over ownership of the physical land itself. Meanwhile, leftists all around are astounded at the peasants' decision. They just cannot fathom that the peasants would simply compromise in fighting for land that was worth blood fighting for. In other words, the leftists cannot believe that the peasants' wishes are actually different from THEIR wishes and THEIR politics.
The peasants of Hacienda Luisita just want to live in peace just like they were before the leftists came in and radicalized them, inflated their minds with grand ambitions and sinister anticapitalist sentiment. The peasants involved in Hacienda Luisita were content in earning an income by tilling a land not their own. Of course, the leftists do not understand this, for when they look at the poor peasants all they can think of is how 'exploited' they are. Society is an arena of conflict where the rich are always exploiting the poor, males are always exploiting females, whites are always exploiting the blacks, etc. In doing this they are the ones perpetuating the tension which they zealously seek to alleviate. Nitpicking and minding other peoples' business is what the left is all about. One can just imagine how self-righteous and arrogant they are to identify themselves with peasants in Hacienda Luisita and recommend politics as the solution to a 'problem' that the peasants never knew they had.
I hope the Hacienda Luisita compromise deal will be an rude awakening for leftists in the Philippines. I hope they become embarrassed in thinking that they know better than the people who actually have substantial interest in the matter. I hope they become sorry for the anguish and suffering that they have rendered unto the Hacienda Luisita farmers.
And yes, they have done harm to the peasants. Agrarian reform has done much more harm than good to the people it is designed to help. Make no mistake about it!
What are these harms done?
1. Politically-charged murders of peasants by hired assassins of the landowners
2. Mass conversion of agricultural land to industrial and residential land
3. Stagnant agricultural sector due to no additional capital investment for fear of land expropriation
But aren't I being too extreme in blaming leftist politicians and activists for something not intended by them? No! Political actions have unintended consequences.
Whether intended or not, and even if harm to the peasants was indirectly caused by leftist politics, those three enumerated above would never have happened without Marxist relgiosity infecting innocent farmers. Intentions don't matter, results do. Land reform activists and politicians should be jailed for what they have done!
The peasants of Hacienda Luisita just want to live in peace just like they were before the leftists came in and radicalized them, inflated their minds with grand ambitions and sinister anticapitalist sentiment. The peasants involved in Hacienda Luisita were content in earning an income by tilling a land not their own. Of course, the leftists do not understand this, for when they look at the poor peasants all they can think of is how 'exploited' they are. Society is an arena of conflict where the rich are always exploiting the poor, males are always exploiting females, whites are always exploiting the blacks, etc. In doing this they are the ones perpetuating the tension which they zealously seek to alleviate. Nitpicking and minding other peoples' business is what the left is all about. One can just imagine how self-righteous and arrogant they are to identify themselves with peasants in Hacienda Luisita and recommend politics as the solution to a 'problem' that the peasants never knew they had.
I hope the Hacienda Luisita compromise deal will be an rude awakening for leftists in the Philippines. I hope they become embarrassed in thinking that they know better than the people who actually have substantial interest in the matter. I hope they become sorry for the anguish and suffering that they have rendered unto the Hacienda Luisita farmers.
And yes, they have done harm to the peasants. Agrarian reform has done much more harm than good to the people it is designed to help. Make no mistake about it!
What are these harms done?
1. Politically-charged murders of peasants by hired assassins of the landowners
2. Mass conversion of agricultural land to industrial and residential land
3. Stagnant agricultural sector due to no additional capital investment for fear of land expropriation
But aren't I being too extreme in blaming leftist politicians and activists for something not intended by them? No! Political actions have unintended consequences.
Whether intended or not, and even if harm to the peasants was indirectly caused by leftist politics, those three enumerated above would never have happened without Marxist relgiosity infecting innocent farmers. Intentions don't matter, results do. Land reform activists and politicians should be jailed for what they have done!
Stop Defending the "National Image"!!!
I am disgusted of the fact that there are Filipinos who want to defend the actions of the Philippine government in handling the Manila hostage tragedy vis-a-vis talking with foreigners. These assclowns want to protect our 'national image' and 'national pride' by being apologizers for the state. I would like to ask these retards how exaclty does that improve any Filipino's lot in a substantial way, except make them ready to let go of the government's crimes and totally hand over their safety to the police thugs.
A person I know of is going to fly abroad and is actually preparing defenses for when curious foreigners ask about the terrible hostage crisis and the Philippine government. What he should do is berate and smear the Philippine government in front of foreigners. There's no reason to sacrifice individual pride to so-called 'national pride' which is merely an artifice used to sedate the childish and weak-minded. I remember the words of H.L. Mencken in saying that 'every decent man is ashamed of the government he lives under'. How true for our times! Decades of heavy bureaucracy, politicized media stupidity and democratic propaganda have actually created a culture that is overly tolerant of the abuses of power, esteem-lowering, self-shaming, miseducated beyond the ability to reason, docile sheep!!!People who want to apologize for evil governments are subsidizing evil by excusing the government of its criminality.
There are actually some who are intelligent enough to know that the Philippine government is unsalvageable but continue to preach the gospel of 'democracy' and 'good governance' on the basis that 'pag-asa nalang ang natitira sa atin bakit mo pa iyan sirain'. While somewhat understandable, they do not realize that the dream has to come to an end and the longer you prolong the dream the worst the end is.The idea that we need to preserve hope in the hopeless is a result of the moral relativism and postmodernist bullcrap prevalent in the universities. If only these 'uplifters of spirits' looked at the facts --- say --- the national debt--- they will realize that they are doing a great evil by perpetuating a sick fantasy.
A person I know of is going to fly abroad and is actually preparing defenses for when curious foreigners ask about the terrible hostage crisis and the Philippine government. What he should do is berate and smear the Philippine government in front of foreigners. There's no reason to sacrifice individual pride to so-called 'national pride' which is merely an artifice used to sedate the childish and weak-minded. I remember the words of H.L. Mencken in saying that 'every decent man is ashamed of the government he lives under'. How true for our times! Decades of heavy bureaucracy, politicized media stupidity and democratic propaganda have actually created a culture that is overly tolerant of the abuses of power, esteem-lowering, self-shaming, miseducated beyond the ability to reason, docile sheep!!!People who want to apologize for evil governments are subsidizing evil by excusing the government of its criminality.
There are actually some who are intelligent enough to know that the Philippine government is unsalvageable but continue to preach the gospel of 'democracy' and 'good governance' on the basis that 'pag-asa nalang ang natitira sa atin bakit mo pa iyan sirain'. While somewhat understandable, they do not realize that the dream has to come to an end and the longer you prolong the dream the worst the end is.The idea that we need to preserve hope in the hopeless is a result of the moral relativism and postmodernist bullcrap prevalent in the universities. If only these 'uplifters of spirits' looked at the facts --- say --- the national debt--- they will realize that they are doing a great evil by perpetuating a sick fantasy.
Tuesday, August 24, 2010
The More Fundamental Issue Behind the Manila Hostage Tragedy
What happened on August 23, 2010 near the Quirino Grandstand was just the most pronounced illustration of government incompetence, thuggery and cowardice seen in a long time. To think that the bus hijacker in this case, Rolando Mendoza, was a former police and awarded as one of the top ten policemen at that, is just mind-boggling and says a lot about the Philippine government in general.
Every aspect of the tragedy from negotiations to the assault to the media to the actions (or inaction) of the president was just an epic failure and deserving of a national face palm.
The main motivation of Mendoza's hijacking of the bus centered around government in the first place. Mendoza together with other killbots in the Philippine National Police were making a lot of money out of extortion in artificial checkpoints. Mendoza felt threatened when he learned about a chef named Christian Kalaw and other victims of extortion told the authorities. So like a typical thug he went to Mr. Kalaw and falsely accused him of illegal parking and taking drugs. The indignant Kalaw demanded a drug test so the state thugs took him to the public hospital where they beat him up and made him swallow shabu before letting him take the drug test. Kalaw was jailed and only released after his fried gave P20,000 to the police.
A year later and after many dismissed proceedings, Mendoza was finally removed from his position by the Ombudsman, but was removed without due process and without his retirement benefits.
These events led to the bus hijacking on August 23, 2010. It is important to note that the hostage tragedy was the result of government 'blowback' from its own operations. First, the government for the longest time has tolerated having thugs in the police force even though corruption and brutality in the PNP is common knowledge. Second, the government acted irresponsibly by releasing this highly trained and well-armed criminal into the open, and released him hungry, that is, without retirement benefits. When you find a criminal you put the criminal in jail, you don't just relieve him of his duties. I guess it works differently in government. The quote below is taken from a respectable blog named 'Dona Victorina'.
"Before this hostage taking, I remember asking my friend in the Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG) why these rogue policemen were being kept on the force (they were first suspended and even considered being shipped to Mindanao). He told me it was better to keep them within the police where their actions can be “controlled.” If they are no longer policemen then, he said, they will be more uncontrollable as criminals."
And my guess is right. We cannot overemphasize the blame that the government deserves for this.
Let us now move on to the blunders of the government in handling this tragedy that it itself created.
1. The brother of the hostage-taker, Gregorio Mendoza, was denied his first request to talk to the hijacker.
2. The media televised the actions taken by the authorities in response to the crime, and gave Mendoza a tactical advantage since the bus had a television in place.
3. Mendoza's brother was shown to be arrested (and harassed) by the police on national television which made Mendoza shoot people on the bus out of fury.
4. The authorities did not acquiesce, at least partially and superficially, to the demands of Mendoza which made the struggle last for eleven hours.
5. The president, the proud protector and servant of the people, could not be contacted by Hong Kong officials and ,as if quite leisurely, delegated the task to local authorities.
The result is nine people dead (including the perpetrator) and national shame. The communists in Mindanao must have gotten a kick out of watching this event unfold on television.
Of course the likelihood of these crimes happening would be very low if people were allowed their natural right to protect themselves. That is, if they could be allowed to bear arms. Without gun control, thugs like Mendoza would think twice before entering a busload of potential gun-carriers.
But no, we have to rely on the police for our safety because guns placed in private hands runs the risk of increased crime and immorality. Only the police are responsible and wise enough to carry guns. Well apparently this thesis has been proven totally wrong by recent events.
The bus tragedy maybe represents a new high for governmental failure but the lesson that it teaches is not new: government does not work. Which is why I am still dumbfounded by leftists advocating socialist health care and socialist education in spite of all its failures in more basic tasks like defense and road building. If the government cannot do its most basic task of protecting the people, how can it do more difficult tasks.
How can the police protect society from crime and immorality if the police is itself the most criminal agency of government?
A more fundamental question would be 'what causes crime and immorality in the first place?' The answer: increased politicization of society causes crime and immorality to flourish. You expect this to happen when the power gap between the ordinary citizen and the police is so big that the police can get away with false accusations and torture . You expect this to happen when you create the largest bureaucracy in the form of the PNP. You expect this to happen when citizens are dependent sheeple living in a dream who think social change can happen by electing a new president.
Sources:
http://donavictorina.blogspot.com/2010/08/uncontrollable-criminals-in-pnp.html
http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/inquirerheadlines/nation/view/20100824-288458/Bloodbath_at_Rizal_Park
http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/inquirerheadlines/nation/view/20100825-288632/TIMELINE-11-Hours-of-Madness
Every aspect of the tragedy from negotiations to the assault to the media to the actions (or inaction) of the president was just an epic failure and deserving of a national face palm.
The main motivation of Mendoza's hijacking of the bus centered around government in the first place. Mendoza together with other killbots in the Philippine National Police were making a lot of money out of extortion in artificial checkpoints. Mendoza felt threatened when he learned about a chef named Christian Kalaw and other victims of extortion told the authorities. So like a typical thug he went to Mr. Kalaw and falsely accused him of illegal parking and taking drugs. The indignant Kalaw demanded a drug test so the state thugs took him to the public hospital where they beat him up and made him swallow shabu before letting him take the drug test. Kalaw was jailed and only released after his fried gave P20,000 to the police.
A year later and after many dismissed proceedings, Mendoza was finally removed from his position by the Ombudsman, but was removed without due process and without his retirement benefits.
These events led to the bus hijacking on August 23, 2010. It is important to note that the hostage tragedy was the result of government 'blowback' from its own operations. First, the government for the longest time has tolerated having thugs in the police force even though corruption and brutality in the PNP is common knowledge. Second, the government acted irresponsibly by releasing this highly trained and well-armed criminal into the open, and released him hungry, that is, without retirement benefits. When you find a criminal you put the criminal in jail, you don't just relieve him of his duties. I guess it works differently in government. The quote below is taken from a respectable blog named 'Dona Victorina'.
"Before this hostage taking, I remember asking my friend in the Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG) why these rogue policemen were being kept on the force (they were first suspended and even considered being shipped to Mindanao). He told me it was better to keep them within the police where their actions can be “controlled.” If they are no longer policemen then, he said, they will be more uncontrollable as criminals."
And my guess is right. We cannot overemphasize the blame that the government deserves for this.
Let us now move on to the blunders of the government in handling this tragedy that it itself created.
1. The brother of the hostage-taker, Gregorio Mendoza, was denied his first request to talk to the hijacker.
2. The media televised the actions taken by the authorities in response to the crime, and gave Mendoza a tactical advantage since the bus had a television in place.
3. Mendoza's brother was shown to be arrested (and harassed) by the police on national television which made Mendoza shoot people on the bus out of fury.
4. The authorities did not acquiesce, at least partially and superficially, to the demands of Mendoza which made the struggle last for eleven hours.
5. The president, the proud protector and servant of the people, could not be contacted by Hong Kong officials and ,as if quite leisurely, delegated the task to local authorities.
The result is nine people dead (including the perpetrator) and national shame. The communists in Mindanao must have gotten a kick out of watching this event unfold on television.
Of course the likelihood of these crimes happening would be very low if people were allowed their natural right to protect themselves. That is, if they could be allowed to bear arms. Without gun control, thugs like Mendoza would think twice before entering a busload of potential gun-carriers.
But no, we have to rely on the police for our safety because guns placed in private hands runs the risk of increased crime and immorality. Only the police are responsible and wise enough to carry guns. Well apparently this thesis has been proven totally wrong by recent events.
The bus tragedy maybe represents a new high for governmental failure but the lesson that it teaches is not new: government does not work. Which is why I am still dumbfounded by leftists advocating socialist health care and socialist education in spite of all its failures in more basic tasks like defense and road building. If the government cannot do its most basic task of protecting the people, how can it do more difficult tasks.
How can the police protect society from crime and immorality if the police is itself the most criminal agency of government?
A more fundamental question would be 'what causes crime and immorality in the first place?' The answer: increased politicization of society causes crime and immorality to flourish. You expect this to happen when the power gap between the ordinary citizen and the police is so big that the police can get away with false accusations and torture . You expect this to happen when you create the largest bureaucracy in the form of the PNP. You expect this to happen when citizens are dependent sheeple living in a dream who think social change can happen by electing a new president.
Sources:
http://donavictorina.blogspot.com/2010/08/uncontrollable-criminals-in-pnp.html
http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/inquirerheadlines/nation/view/20100824-288458/Bloodbath_at_Rizal_Park
http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/inquirerheadlines/nation/view/20100825-288632/TIMELINE-11-Hours-of-Madness
Monday, August 2, 2010
Favorite Jefferson Quotes
"The man who reads nothing at all is better educated than the man who reads nothing but newspapers."
"The moment a person forms a theory, his imagination sees in every object only the traits which favor that theory."
"There is a natural aristocracy among men. The grounds of this are virtue and talents."
"Whenever you do a thing, act as if all the world were watching."
"Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call to her tribunal every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blindfolded fear."
"In matters of style, swim with the current; in matters of principle, stand like a rock."
"A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine."
"A wise and frugal government, which shall leave men free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned - this is the sum of good government."
"There is not a truth existing which I fear or would wish unknown to the whole world"
"I swear upon the altar of God, eternal hostility to every form of tyranny over the mind of man."
"The moment a person forms a theory, his imagination sees in every object only the traits which favor that theory."
"There is a natural aristocracy among men. The grounds of this are virtue and talents."
"Whenever you do a thing, act as if all the world were watching."
"Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call to her tribunal every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blindfolded fear."
"In matters of style, swim with the current; in matters of principle, stand like a rock."
"A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine."
"A wise and frugal government, which shall leave men free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned - this is the sum of good government."
"There is not a truth existing which I fear or would wish unknown to the whole world"
"I swear upon the altar of God, eternal hostility to every form of tyranny over the mind of man."
Beginner to Intermediary Reading List
Books and websites that refute leftist professors a million times over. This is the intellectual ammunition that the youth need if we are to stave off despotism from finalizing in the Philippines.
Important websites:
http://mises.org/
Easily the best economics website in the world. Make this your homepage! :D
http://www.lewrockwell.com/
Confronting the United States Predatory Interventionism
Books on Philosophy:
http://marsexxx.com/ycnex/Ayn_Rand-The_Virtue_of_Selfishness.pdf
"The Virtue of Selfishness" by Ayn Rand
Rand's most important contribution to philosophy, a rational ethics.
'Atlas Shrugged' and 'The Fountainhead' both by Ayn Rand
"The Ethics of Liberty" by Murray N. Rothbard
Social ethics applied
Free books on economics and political economy:
http://jim.com/econ/
"Economics in One Lesson" by Henry Hazzlit
The easiest and surest way to understand economics
http://www.fee.org/pdf/books/The_Law.pdf
"The Law" by Frederic Bastiat
No genuinely liberal education is complete without having read Frederic Bastiat
http://jim.com/hayek.htm
"The Road to Serfdom" by F.A. Hayek
What you need to learn about political economy
http://mises.org/etexts/SocCap.pdf
"A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism" by Hans Hermann Hoppe
Analyzes all political-economic systems and proves capitalism as best
http://mises.org/books/whathasgovernmentdone.pdf
"What Has Government Done To Our Money" by Murray N. Rothbard
Easiest way to understand money
http://mises.org/books/manwelfarestate.pdf
"Man vs. The Welfare State" by Henry Hazzlit
Welfare state is the wet dream of the democratic left. They will hate this.
Go. Speak truth. Love Freedom.
Important websites:
http://mises.org/
Easily the best economics website in the world. Make this your homepage! :D
http://www.lewrockwell.com/
Confronting the United States Predatory Interventionism
Books on Philosophy:
http://marsexxx.com/ycnex/Ayn_Rand-The_Virtue_of_Selfishness.pdf
"The Virtue of Selfishness" by Ayn Rand
Rand's most important contribution to philosophy, a rational ethics.
'Atlas Shrugged' and 'The Fountainhead' both by Ayn Rand
"The Ethics of Liberty" by Murray N. Rothbard
Social ethics applied
Free books on economics and political economy:
http://jim.com/econ/
"Economics in One Lesson" by Henry Hazzlit
The easiest and surest way to understand economics
http://www.fee.org/pdf/books/The_Law.pdf
"The Law" by Frederic Bastiat
No genuinely liberal education is complete without having read Frederic Bastiat
http://jim.com/hayek.htm
"The Road to Serfdom" by F.A. Hayek
What you need to learn about political economy
http://mises.org/etexts/SocCap.pdf
"A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism" by Hans Hermann Hoppe
Analyzes all political-economic systems and proves capitalism as best
http://mises.org/books/whathasgovernmentdone.pdf
"What Has Government Done To Our Money" by Murray N. Rothbard
Easiest way to understand money
http://mises.org/books/manwelfarestate.pdf
"Man vs. The Welfare State" by Henry Hazzlit
Welfare state is the wet dream of the democratic left. They will hate this.
Go. Speak truth. Love Freedom.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)