Response to the "Market Failure" Drones (Tom Woods)

Tom Woods reviews Bob Murphy's important new book called Politically Incorrect Guide to the Great Depression and the New Deal:

"The time to worry about depressions," F.A. Hayek once wrote, "is, unfortunately, when they are furthest from the minds of most people." He's right, of course: imagine trying to tell a house flipper in 2004 that the housing market was a giant bubble that was going to burst. At best he'd smile politely, and then roll around in his fresh pile of Federal Reserve Notes.

It's during an artificial, unsustainable boom like the one we've just lived through that, unbeknownst to most people, the real damage is done to the economy. But that's when they're least likely to listen or care.

Now that we're living through the bust, on the other hand, many people are listening. That's why it's so important for economists of the Austrian School to redouble their efforts, whether in terms of writing, public speaking, media, or indeed whatever platform they can get, to promote a sound, free-market interpretation of what's happening. The drones who exist to repeat clichés about market failure need a robust and energetic reply from people who know what they're talking about.

Robert P. Murphy has done exactly this.

Read the rest

Peter Schiff on the Daily Show

Peter Schiff had a great appearance on the Daily Show with Jon Stewart last night:

Comedy Central - Peter Schiff on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart 6/9/09

Despite some rumors on the internet, Peter did not announce he was running for U.S. Senate, but only that he is thinking about it. Although many seem to be disappointed, I for one am not. Why? Because the best thing about being involved in a political campaign is the potential to reach many with the message of freedom, and Peter already is doing that through his work at Euro Pacific Capital and his numerous media appearances and books. There are others such as Rand Paul and Adam Kokesh who will have a far greater benefit by running for office because they do not currently have any media exposure.

The freedom movement will likely never have a majority in Congress, and even if they do, it will difficult for many to avoid the pitfalls explained by Lord Acton in his axiom, "All power tends to corrupt; absolute power corrupts absolutely." The best we can hope for is that we get a few principled individuals in office who can stir up the pot a little bit.

As much as I love Ron Paul, I think I've read somewhere that he has never had a single bill of his passed (although I am closely monitoring the progress of HR 1207). What he has done, however, is to stir in the hearts of many a yearning for freedom and to educate them on far the government has strayed from its founding principles.

And I think that is key to the movement and probably always will be: education. And the best place to start is the Ludwig von Mises Institute. If you haven't done so, I encourage you to check out the enormous wealth of information on their site to learn more about Austrian Economics and libertarianism!

Behind the Wire: An Insider's Reflections on Gitmo (Daniel Lakemacher)

Conscientious objector Daniel Lakemacher takes us through his journey from being a dehumanized pawn at Guantanimo to becoming a heroic antiwar activist:

After having been deployed for six months as a member of the medical team assigned to the detainee population at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, I can easily say that Gitmo is the most hate-filled place I have ever experienced. The animosity I felt in the "camps" on a daily basis was almost palpable, and it often required a very conscious effort to not escalate the hostility.

Because of the powerful emotions involved, it has taken me more than a year to finally identify the key factors that prevented me from previously being able to question the justification of Gitmo. During the six months in which I saw other human beings confined to cages, I began to undertake an intense study of the concepts of liberty and natural rights. Over the course of the year that followed, this investigation led me to the whole-hearted conviction that war is immoral. Amazingly, even after such a distinct transformation, it took still more time to apply my new understanding to my own role in Gitmo.

Read the rest

Congressman Ron Paul Talks Foreign Policy: New Face, Same Policy (HuffPo)

Kathleen Wells of the Huffington Post does a nice interview with Dr. Paul:

Kathleen Wells: As a member of the U. S. House of Representatives' Foreign Affairs Committee, what is your take on this issue of torture?

Congressman Ron Paul: Well, it's against the law - both our law and international law. So, we shouldn't do it. And I'm against it for personal, moral reasons. I think it's horrible. And for practical reasons, I think it's absolutely worthless. And if we are serious about getting information, if we use other techniques, we actually get more information.

Kathleen Wells: So, you do believe that we were committing torture in our interrogations in Guantanamo?

Congressman Ron Paul: I don't think the pictures I've seen were fictitious - the ones that were released a year or two ago. And, obviously, there are some more pictures of torture that they draw more attention to because they refuse to release them, which means that it must be a true indictment of what they were doing.

Kathleen Wells: What are your thoughts on President Obama's decision to release the torture memos?

Congressman Ron Paul: I think he is purely political. I think he has backed down on what he said. He was elected for change and it is the same old stuff and he is as much of a neo-con now as Bush was with this issue and other issues. The war has been expanded. He continues with not closing down Guantanamo. There is probably, for as most [sic] as we can tell, there is still secret rendition going on. We just moved some of this process overseas. We are not going to be aware of it in detail.

Read the rest

You are invited to the Ron Paul Family Barbecue!

Dear Friend,

My family and I have a tradition; we kick off each re-election campaign with a down-home Texas Barbecue for friends and supporters. This year, I hope you can join us.

As the Congressional race for 2010 winds up, I want you to mark Saturday, August 15 on your calendar and hope you can set the date aside to join me in Galveston, Texas, a beautiful part of my home district. I have reserved space in the San Luis Conference Center, located on the Galveston Seawall overlooking the Gulf of Mexico. I am sure you will be as impressed as I am by the hard work and determination my neighbors in Galveston have put into rebuilding after the tragedy of Hurricane Ike.

We plan to enjoy great food, music, special guests and of course, have a lot of fun. Galveston is a great place to visit, and Carol and I are very proud to show it off to you. It is also a wonderful spot to get away for a night or the weekend, so we are working with hotels on the island to secure discounted room rates.

There are two opponents planning to run against me in the upcoming primary. Both are gearing up to attack me for defending the principles you and I hold dear: liberty, limited government and a sensible foreign policy. But, if you help me with a strong show of support, we will take the wind right out of their sails and have a great time while we do it!

Again, please mark August 15 on your calendar. More information about our Barbecue will be coming soon by email and on www.RonPaulforCongress.com. Together, we can make this a tremendous event.

In Liberty,



Ron Paul

Cheney's Revenge: Coming to a Police Station Near You (Will Grigg)

Will Grigg on a "justice" system that now allows cops to use Tasers to subdue uncooperative but non-violent citizens (yeah, that'll never be abused, right?):

Ryan S. Smith of Niagara Falls, New York, is a 21-year-old ex-con suspected of taking part in a vicious kidnapping and robbery. He is, quite likely, a fairly nasty specimen of humanity. Whether or not that's the case, he will likely become a pivotal figure in the legal struggle over institutionalizing torture as method of enforcing court orders and conducting police interrogations.

In July 2006, four suspects invaded a home, bound and gagged two small children, and took the mother hostage. While one remained behind, three of the suspects took the mother to another home, where they shot a man while carrying out a robbery. (The victim, fortunately, survived.)

While watching the children, the fourth conspirator -- Smith, according to prosecutors -- helped himself to a soda, apparently unaware that by doing so he would leave behind a potentially critical quantum of DNA evidence.

Read the rest, and see Wendy McElroy's take on the issue.

D-Day Revisionism

Laurence Vance hopes we don't have to live through another D-Day:

We have heard much about D-Day this weekend. I am not here to question the bravery of U.S. soldiers or the evils of the Nazis. But I do want to point out two things that we don't hear much about this time of year.

We are continually told that the D-Day invasion helped to liberate Europe from the Nazis. True. But rarely do we hear that after Europe was liberated from Hitler, much of it was turned over to Stalin.

And then there is the effect of the D-Day invasion on civilians. According to an article about Antony Beevor's new book, D-Day, 20,000 French civilians were killed within three months of the D-Day landing. Some villages in Normandy only recently began having D-Day celebrations. What? How ungrateful these people were for the "hundreds of tons of bombs destroying entire cities and wiping out families." Or perhaps it was because of the "theft and looting of Normandy households and farmsteads by liberating soldiers" that "began on June 6 and never stopped during the entire summer." Or perhaps it was the "3,500 rapes by American servicemen in France between June 1944 and the end of the war."

Please don't write and tell me how brave your father or grandfather was on D-Day. I am not disputing that for a minute. It is the horrors of war for civilians that is my point. I don't want there to have to be another D-Day.

And Bill Anderson has a nice follow-up post:

Laurence's post and the articles on D-Day on this page are a reminder that there is much more to D-Day than what comes from the near-religious annual celebrations that always occur each year on June 6. This date is treated as thought it were sanctified and we are "celebrating" the "victory" of the Legions of God over the Legions of Satan.

Now, like Laurence, I believe the record of the Nazis speaks for itself, but what occurred in Europe during those sad years did not happen in a vacuum. Furthermore, the message that it was D-Day that ultimately resulted in the defeat of Nazi Germany does violence to the fact that the Russians already were pushing the Germans backwards in the horrible fighting on the Eastern Front.

Likewise, we forget such things as Operation Keelhaul in which the "liberating Americans" took part in a cynical, murderous plot in which thousands of innocents were executed or sent off to prison camps to die by our "Russian allies." Nikolai Tolstoy writes about the aftermath of one of these incidents:

The Americans returned to Plattling (where they had delivered Russian expatriates to the Russian troops) visibly shamefaced. Before their departure from the rendezvous in the forest, many had seen rows of bodies already hanging from the branches of nearby trees. On their return, even the SS men in a neighboring compound lined the wire fence and railed at them for their behavior. The Americans were too ashamed to reply.

Winners have the privilege of writing history, and a lot of whoppers have been written into the history of World War II. As Laurence said, those of us critical of U.S. policy and the D-Day celebrations are not taking the sides of the Nazis and are not promoting some obscure or imaginary set of events.

Instead, we are pointing out that war itself is evil, and that people -- even good people -- do horrible and evil things when acting in warfare. Americans are told in their history books that war is glorious, and that people prove their "worth" only on the field of battle. Well, some of us believe that is a lie, and we want to expose that lie for what it is.

And also see this great article by Hugh Schofield on the horrors of D-Day and war in general.

Roger Young's Images and Quotes of the Week

Here are links to Roger Young's latest editions of his excellent series called "Image Review of the Week"....



....and "Quotes of the Week":

From the Light:
“The corruption and abusive nature of “law enforcement” can’t be handled through minor reform; it’s a symptom, not the cause, and it is so intertwined with the nature of the state itself that the two cannot be separated. The political class’s attack dogs have gained a taste for power, and so long as we allow that class to rule us, those dogs will be fed.”
~ Thomas L. Knapp

Read the rest of the Quotes of the Week

Ladies for Liberty on Gitmo, prison labor, more

Rachel "ladyjade" Mills and a couple of friends have started an interesting YouTube "show" called Ladies4Liberty, and their latest is excellent! The ladies talk about Gitmo, prison labor, global warming, and the auto bankruptcies. Watch it at the link below:

YouTube - Newsroom for June 7 - Gitmo update, prison labor, global warming, auto bankruptcies

Does Obedience Imply Consent? (Roger Young)

Another great post by Roger Young, this one in the spirit of Lysander Spooner:

US Loyalists will argue that I “consent” to governance by their state due to the fact I:

1) obey laws I disagree with (and therefore give consent by default) and

2) remain living within the state’s claimed jurisdiction (instead of finding some other place to live).

“Consent” is surely a meaningless formality when a gun is put to your head with the instructions, “Obey” or be locked in a cage or be forced to surreptitiously make your way “across zee border.” When a robber sticks a firearm in your face and demands your wallet, does your obedience to this demand imply that you have agreed to be governed by him? If you don't agree, should you not resist but instead move yourself to a location where he can no longer find you and rob you again?

I always marvel at the “you have the freedom to leave” argument. Why should I leave just because some organization (whose creation precedes my birth) claims a monopoly of power over my life and property?

Read the rest