halbowden

Oh dear, oh dear. It appears I made a wrong turn back around Albuquerque. My sincerest apologies. I will carry on with my search through the forest dark, alone. It is strange though, what I started looking for grows paler, colder in my mind. I fear soon I will forget its feel and form entirely. It fades like a dream, or a kindling-fire with no fuel. You see, I fled from a soft-soiled swamp with this fire in my mind. I ran to the forest searching for a more solid ground. I wanted to see something beyond the stale look cast upon the elders, something to help me know the fire I bore was real, not as some strange, twisting knife crafted well before my mind's eye. The Boy on the Bicycle

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/c...icle5183045.ece Defend Disney from his Mickey Mouse critics As the cartoon rodent reaches 80, we should celebrate his creator - a genius and one of the best arguments for capitalism ... The critics disliked Disney not because they hated his flaws, but because they despised his achievements. He created modern mass entertainment. And that is what his opponents don't like. They think it is plastic, naive, a sin against nature, an insult to creativity. Walt saw it differently. He was bringing high quality entertainment to people who had little in their lives, good quality merchandise in place of tat, brilliantly made films in place of amateur ones, artistic imagination to those who almost never encountered it. He provided capitalism with its best defence - that it can nourish creativity and inspiration. The brilliance of Snow White, the wit of Mickey Mouse, the overwhelming, stunning commercial vision that produced the theme parks. Walt Disney was a genius.

http://mises.org/story/910 Left and Right: The Prospects for Liberty Murray N. Rothbard Originally appeared in Left and Right, Spring 1965, pp. 4-22. ... For the libertarian, the main task of the present epoch is to cast off his needless and debilitating pessimism, to set his sights on long-run victory and to set about the road to its attainment. To do this, he must, perhaps first of all, drastically realign his mistaken view of the ideological spectrum; he must discover who his friends and natural allies are, and above all perhaps, who his enemies are. Armed with this knowledge, let him proceed in the spirit of radical long-run optimism that one of the great figures in the history of libertarian thought, Randolph Bourne, correctly identified as the spirit of youth. Let Bourne's stirring words serve also as the guidepost for the spirit of liberty:

http://mises.org/books/inclined.pdf Inclined to Liberty LOUIS E. CARABINI Chapter 28 KARL MARX WHAT EXACTLY LED TO THE collapse of the Soviet Empire? Was it communism or totalitarianism? Is there, in fact, a difference between the two? Marx would not have condoned the tyranny used by those who acted in his name, but for Marx to expect that his words "from each according to his ability and to each according to his needs" would not be used to justify despotic acts is quite naïve for someone who called himself a scientist. Marx was not, in fact, a scientist; he saw, but ignored, the abundant data available in England that refuted his contentions. According to Marx, all the value of a good derives from the labor that goes into its production. This labor theory of value is in opposition to the subjective theory of value, which posits the value of a good or service is determined by individuals, regardless of the time and energy (labor) that went into its production. The labor theory of value is fallacious; if it were not so, one of my paintings (God forbid!) would be as valuable as one by Vincent van Gogh. Based on the labor theory of value, Marx claimed that workers do not get all of the proceeds from a sale because they are exploited by the rich factory owner. He further claimed that factory owners and landowners, having control of the political system, are able to siphon off a portion of the wealth in the form of profits that should, instead, flow to the workers. On this point, Marx was wrong, even during his time and based on the conditions where he lived. Workers in London were continually improving their conditions. While surrounded by clear evidence to the contrary, he nevertheless wrote: "In proportion as capital accumulates, the lot of the labourer, be his payment high or low, must grow worse. Accumulation of wealth at one pole is at the same time accumulation of misery, agony of toil, slavery, ignorance, brutality, mental degradation at the opposite pole.45" 45Karl Marx, Das Kapital (1867). Marx's critique of capitalism is not valid, but that invalidity in and of itself is no crime. Many who read and believed his contentions indoctrinated the masses with his teachings, and that in itself is not a crime, either. But when that indoctrination failed to improve conditions as Marx had contended it would, the leaders of the movement then resorted to physical force. They tortured and killed millions by decree and starved millions of others by compulsory collectivist programs. Those actions are crimes—indeed, acts of genocide. Marx might have been appalled to see what happened, or he may have simply turned his head and ignored the evidence, as he did when he wrote his critique of capitalism. Marx dreamed of a world where labor was a fulfillment of one's need to work, as love is a fulfillment of one's need for sex. He envisioned a world without money, private property, or inequality, in which everyone would have the greatest fulfillment of life and liberty. Although he ridiculed religion as an "opiate of the masses," his promises were, ironically, even more seductive and addictive than religion; they promised paradise here on earth. What a wonderful promise to hear when you're a struggling worker: have faith, and a Garden of Eden awaits you just around the corner. The strategies employed by the disciples of Marx to indoctrinate the masses also resemble those used by the disciples of Christ. They each employed rituals, repetitious readings, rote declarations, strict allegiance, and a vigorous, proselytizing campaign. Historically and ironically, many who failed to "see" the merits of communism or failed to conform to the dogma of the church were tortured and killed. Such atrocities took the form of crusades, witch hunts,labor camps, forced famines, and executions of any detractors who were deemed to be traitors, sinners, heretics, or merely obstructionists. 46, 47 48 46Matthew White, "Selected Death Tolls for Wars, Massacres and Atrocities Before the 20th Century," http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat0.htm 47Brian Levack, The Witch-Hunt in Early Modern Europe, 2nd ed. (London: Longman, 1995). The author estimates there were about sixty-thousand accused witches executed in Europe. The estimate of deaths by others ranges between twenty thousand and one hundred thousand from 1400 to 1800. 48Robert Conquest, The Great Terror: Stalin's Purge of the Thirties (New York: Macmillan, 1968). The author estimates those killed under Stalin by executions from 1936 to 1938 were about one million; from 1936 to 1950 about twelve million died in the camps; and three-and-a-half million died in the 1930–1936 collectivization. Overall, he concludes Stalin was responsible for at least twenty million deaths. Mao Tse-tung, another disciple of Marx, caused the death of an additional thirty million in China between 1958 and 1962. The suffering and killing of those unwilling to conform to someone else's political or religious beliefs continue in many parts of the world today. Even in this country, religious fanatics impose their dogma and values upon others by using the strong arm of the State. In this respect, although their beliefs may be at odds with those of Marxists, these believers also endorse the concept of mastery over the lives of others. Communism, like religion, can be practiced without everyone's indulgence. I wonder whether, if Marx were alive today, he would believe as he did then. Maybe he would not scorn capitalism, but rather, accept its technologically advanced society. Those who see communism as a better way of life can now choose to live that life without the need for others to do likewise. No longer is there a need for a revolution. Today, because of technology, one can earn the basic necessities of life in a small fraction of the time it took during the nineteenth century, when Marx lived.49 If work, as Marx suggests, is a fulfillment of a human need (as I agree it is), one can now more easily choose a form of work that brings a personal fulfillment of that need. Fellow Marxists can form personal communes and avoid money, private property, and inequality. They can live the life that Marx dreamed of living. In a free society, they can practice their communal convictions to their heart's content—even encouraging others to join them. Such associations would not be too unlike those seen in a monastery or convent, where the lifestyles chosen by their members are voluntary. In this respect, communism is not in conflict with liberty, since the communal association with others is not one of coercion. 49The gross domestic product (adjusted for inflation and deflation) of the material standard of living in the United States from 1820 to 1998 increased approximately twenty-two-fold, or an average of 1.73 percent per year. EH.Net Encyclopedia. However, when Marxists demand that everyone must live their lives in the same way as Marxists do, their alleged ideology, lifestyle, and fulfillment of a need just become façades to cover up a ruthless quest for social and political power. Despite my criticism of Marx's so-called science, his utopian promises, his fallacious labor theory of value, and his denial of the labor conditions around him, there is little doubt that Marx wanted the best for humanity. He spent his life living as he believed, and I find him to have been a man of spirit who lived by his convictions. This is also true, however, of many do-gooders who try to reform the world. They see conditions of the world that they despise and try to improve them, while, unfortunately, neither possessing nor seeking a clear understanding of causality and human nature. Armed with misconceptions of the real world and fallacious reasoning, these reformers pound the pavement for their cause, and when they discover that their solution only worsens matters, they simply pound harder. Marx was the world's most notorious do-gooder, and those who take him to heart still keep pounding harder. Today many who despise the real world continue to find comfort in their faith in a Marxist utopian world.

Why, thank you. Hal

I guess I'll use my first post on this board to say that the wife and I are both big Ron Paul fans. We saw him on Jay Leno and cheered along with the audience when he talked about sacking the IRS. It is a shame that the Republican party can't see the opportunity they have with him on their roster. Paul is a strong QB on a team that ignores his talent and potential. It is like putting John Elway on the bench! The wife is telling me it is time to get off the computer now, we have things to do. Hal