Laissez-faire

The CIA released a report known as “The Family Jewels,” documenting illegal activities conducted by the agency, as reported by staff members. The report includes the infamous MKULTRA program, in which citizens were unknowingly given strong doses of mind altering drugs such as LSD.

I’m a bit curious to what extent they were involved with the commercial drug industry. On page 416 of the report, they admit their “relations with commercial drug manufacturers.”

It was suggested that the program was “defensive, in the sense that we would recognize certain behavior if similar materials were used against Americans”. Here, we see again, the rights of American citizens being blatantly overridden by the state, supposedly for the “common good.” And the MKULTRA program is only a small part of the 702 page report.

The International Society for Individual Liberty created a flash animation entitled “Philosophy of Liberty.” The animation is a wonderful introduction to the philosophy that our country was more or less founded on. As you’ll see in the animation, the philosophy of liberty is based on the concept of self-ownership. This is a hard concept to argue against: If you don’t own yourself, then who owns you? And what right then, would you have to defend yourself against ANY, even blatantly unethical, action taken by your owner.

It is my contention that the distance we stray from this philosophy is proportional to the despotism, racism, hardship, and other atrocities or inconveniences we face. The idea that one person or group of people has authority over another is the root of most of our problems. Public policy should be developed strictly within the bounds of this philosophy in order to protect the liberty, and promote the prosperity of the people.

Last year Rep. Charles Rangel sponsored legislation to reinstate the draft. Edwards endorsed the idea of conscription for both military and non-military purposes during a speech back in May.  Now George Bush is considering the Draft to maintain troop levels in Iraq.
“One of the things we ought to be thinking about” Edwards said, “is some level of mandatory service to our country, so that everybody in America — not just the poor kids who get sent to war — are serving this country.”

“Mandatory service” is called slavery. No ifs ands or buts about it.

This is one of the worst attacks on our civil rights that I can imagine. I’m appalled by the lack of dissent to these ideas. Are parents just going to sit back and let their children be abducted by the government? If you are not able to sustain troop levels required to fight your war, then you may want to reconsider the validity of it.  And if you are concerned about the socio-economic status of the majority of military recruits; making everyone a slave is going to create greater ethical problems than it claims to repair.

Earlier this week, Judge Andrew Napolitano gave a speech at a Future of Freedom Foundation conference. The eye opening speech was entitled “Civil Liberties in Wartime.” Judge Napolitano explained how our civil liberties have been eroding since the ratification of the Constitution, and how war is used as justification for such encroachments. Among other reckless legislation, he highlights the dangers of the unconstitutional Patriot Act. I included the first of four videos capturing his entire speech as well as the links to the other three. Though the first video is relevant an interesting, the other three are the bread and butter of his speech. I highly recommend these videos.

Video 2
Video 3
Video 4

Los Angeles city attorney, Rocky Delgadillo, strongly believes that no one should receive preferential treatment within the legal system…well, no one except maybe his wife.

The same people responsible for protecting the United States from terrorists, can’t even secure their own computers.  Does this really come as a surprise to anyone?

The Irony in the exclusion of presidential candidate, Ron Paul, from the Iowa forum, lies in the fact that it is hosted by Iowans for Tax Relief and Iowa Christian Alliance. Dr. Paul has been named “Taxpayers’ Best Friend” by the National Taxpayers Union for the past 10 years, for his outstanding congressional voting record on tax issues. Participants include Mitt Romney, Sam Brownback, Jim Gilmore, Mike Huckabee, Tommy Thompson, and Tom Tancredo. It’s unclear why Dr. Paul was not invited to the forum. What is clear, is that Iowans for Tax relief are not as concerned about tax relief as the name of their organization might suggest.

Though I disagree with him on many issues, Rep. Kirk of Illinois, brings up a good point. Should politicians convicted of a felony receive taxpayer-funded retirement checks?

Speaking of corrupt politicians, check out this list of the ten most corrupt politicians of 2006 according to Judicial Watch. The list includes Jack Abramoff, Hillary Clinton, and Tom Delay. The dishonorable mentions include John Conyers, Patrick Kennedy, and Barack Obama.

Inspired by a post in the Monroe Talks forum, I decided to chime in on the topic of smoking bans. We, as a country, have unfortunately lost sight of what private property means. Some states including New York and California have adopted smoking bans in restaurants and bars. This is a blatant abuse of rights.

I, myself, don’t smoke. Nor do I enjoy being in smoke filled buildings. However, I support a business owner’s right to allow or disallow smoking in his or her establishment based on whatever criteria they choose. No one, government included, has the right to force a business owner, or individual, to ban smoking on their private property. This is the sole decision of the owner of such an establishment. The bar or restaurant owner is offering the consumer a service at a certain cost. The consumer must decide whether or not they wish to partake in a mutual exchange. A conflict arises when a business owner is forced to alter their service, when it was not in violation of anyone’s rights in the first place. These are the rights that the government should be protecting, not depriving.

Possible health risks caused by second hand smoke are irrelevant, and bringing this into the argument only acts to cloud the real issue of private property rights. Adults should be free to make decisions on their own, and carry out mutually beneficial transactions at their own will.

complete list of smoking bans in the U.S.

Michigan produces about 75 percent of the country’s tart cherries, making them a significant part of the state’s economy. Studies conducted by Michigan State University, among others, concluded that cherries may be a better pain reliever than anti-inflammatory drugs such as Aspirin. When cherry growers began citing these studies, the FDA sent them warning letters. The FDA referred to cherries as “drugs” due the the claims on the labeling, and required them to remove the scientific information from their labels.

Bill Sardi, a consumer advocate and health journalist from California writes:

“While the FDA was threatening cherry growers, it was giving approval to a drug maker for a new type of COX-2 inhibiting anti-inflammatory drug that claimed it was safer than ibuprofen or aspirin. The FDA also permitted this new prescription-only anti-inflammatory drug to be advertised on television, even though long-term safety data was not available. As it turns out, this drug wasn’t any safer than aspirin and the FDA took no subsequent action against the drug maker that submitted misleading preliminary safety data in its application for FDA approval. This anti-inflammatory drug went on to cause thousands of side effects and was associated with the deaths of an estimated 20,000 Americans, mostly due to mortal heart attacks. An FDA “whistleblower,” Dr. David Graham, had to alert the public to this problem.”

One Congressman realized the absurdity of these actions and sought to prevent future occurrences. Congressman Ron Paul introduced legislation (HR 2117), to protect companies from being illegitimately censored by the FDA. It’s likely this bill will not be passed, as a result of the lobbying power of the major drug companies, who seek to manipulate the FDA for their benefit.

Lone freedom fighter on Capital Hill, and Republican Presidential Candidate, Ron Paul, explains why the housing bubble is the result of a failed monetary system. More specifically, the Federal Reserve. Dr. Paul stands alone amongst the presidential candidates, as one who has a clear understanding of economic policy. Unfortunately most Americans are oblivious to the destructive nature of our monetary policy and find it easier to erroneously blame the unregulated market.

Back in May, President Bush signed a National Security Directive, granting the executive branch power to control all aspects of government in the case of a “catastrophic emergency.” This emergency is loosley defined as “…any incident, regardless of location, that results in extraordinary levels of mass casualties, damage, or disruption severely affecting the U.S. population, infrastructure, environment, economy, or government functions.”

The directive would allow the President to maintain this authority until the catastrophe has subsided.

A main goal of the directive is to ensure our government operates within the bounds of the Constitution during a catastrophe. Ironically, it doesn’t appear that the Constitution was consulted when drafting this Presidential directive.

As a bit of an introduction, I’d like to bring attention to a book (first published as a pamphlet) that has helped to shape my political views. The Law, by Frederic Bastiat was the first serious political document that caused me to look at modern politics the way I do now. It helped me to understand why the framers built into the Constitution such stringent limitations on the federal government, and why it is so important to enforce these restrictions. It became very clear, after reading it, that we have strayed a great distance from the principles held by the founders of our nation.

Bastiat was a French economist in the early to mid nineteenth century, and an outspoken advocate for the free market economy. Though he praised the United States (circa 1850) for the unmatched protection of liberty, he did not hesitate to criticize two “issues” where he felt the U.S. had “assumed the character of plunderer.” These two issues, Bastiat asserted, were slavery and tariffs.

The Law provides a brief defense of classical liberal principles as the foundation for not only a morally superior form of government, but also one in which peace and prosperity flourish. This relatively short document can be read in its entirety here, as well as many other sites on the internet.

By Jacob Longton (jlongton@gmail.com)

It started out as a question I asked as a child: “why don’t they just take money from rich people and give it to poor people?” The answer I received, though incomplete, was enough to provoke an interest in politics that would lead me on a quest for a philosophy under which all questions of political nature could be answered in a consistent and logical manner. Years of investigation have led me to a much better understanding of the functions of politics, and a concern for the outcome they yield. I remain unsettled on some issues and virtually obstinate on others, but I never dismiss the ideas of a reasonable opposing view. I feel it’s important for the people of any country to closely monitor the actions of their elected officials, and to question the intentions, or more importantly the consequences, of their policy. To sit back and rely on politicians to make our decisions for us, is to let go of the liberty we have so fortunately been blessed with. My desire, if nothing else, is to inspire thought on political issues, and encourage a thoughtful analysis of these issues.