June 27, 2005

Free Immigration Or Invasion
By Michael Gaddy

In the month of April I traveled to the Arizona border and worked as a volunteer with the Minuteman Project. Upon returning I wrote an article that appeared at LRC. For several days that followed I received many emails, including fellow writers at LRC who took issue with my stance on protecting our borders. I understand the issue this raises with those who believe in the open border policy advocated by many Libertarians. My question is: can we live with the theory of open borders when obviously what we are experiencing is not people immigrating for a better way of life, but an invasion?

The one question that I never received an answer to from all those who wrote me in opposition to my position was: with the current open border policy and the welfare state how do we protect the private property of not only those who live on the U.S. side of the border, but others whose private property is being destroyed by the criminal element that constantly flows across our porous borders? (Read the rest here)

What now? (Part I – Consequences)
By Nathan A. Barton © 2004

"And just when will the revolution actually start now?" That was the first question my wife had when I told her of the insane 5-4 ruling by the Supreme Court announced yesterday, concerning the power of government to seize private property. And it is a valid question. This morning, a raft of stories about some of the 10,000 "eminent domain" actions in progress across the former republican union popped up on various web news-sites and newspaper sites.

As many people have pointed out, the United States Constitution, and virtually all institutions of free nations, are built on a solid bedrock of establishing the principle of ownership of property. My recent article on nation-building listed this as the number 2 priority, right after removing government's power to harm its members or neighbors:

"Establish ownership of property (institutionalize property). Establish and enforce ownership by individuals of all possible resources, including land, structures, water, air, airspace, broadcasting bands (frequencies), ideas, and rights to provide specified services to specific persons or in specific locations for specific purposes. English common law developed to provide this institutionalization of property, and evolved by hard knocks to ensure that resources (assets) held informally or put to use were recognized as property. The institution of property, free from the whims of rulers, invaders, and envious neighbors is essential to create a free society." (Read the rest here)

Your Feedback and Comments
The Mailbag for Monday

Libertarian Commentary on The News
By Nathan A. Barton © 2005

After a weekend of camping and discussion and pondering, I'm back for another shot at news and commentary, and asking some pointed questions. These views (and questions) are mine, not necessarily those of anyone else associated with TPoL or any libertarian organization or website.

Time for American Rebellion?

Supreme Court writes corporate welfare into Constitution
CNN
"The Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that local governments may seize people's homes and businesses -- even against their will -- for private economic development. It was a decision fraught with huge implications for a country with many areas, particularly the rapidly growing urban and suburban areas, facing countervailing pressures of development and property ownership rights."

Although I reported in the last column (this story broke after the publication time of RRND and FND on Thursday, I do not hesitate to point out - so not their fault), I am including this again. The reaction to this crime is encouraging, but not nearly as much as I wish, and no coordinated action has yet been proposed or urged. And too much of the reaction, like this headline (the RRND one), is NOT in the right direction. Yeah, this is "corporate welfare" to be sure, but that is a very minor issue in comparison to what this decision really means. That can be found stated succinctly in an editorial in the New Hampshire Union Leader: "In essence, all land in the United States is now state-owned." Even if this were the ONLY bad decision the courts have made in the past 50 years, it would be enough to (as a few have, already) call for open rebellion; when combined with the current state of affairs in this nation, it is imperative that open and overt resistance take priority. And unlike so many issues and so much of the way the FedGov (and state AND local governments) have become tyrannical, THIS is an issue that is simple and easy to explain, can be VERY emotional, and SHOULD cause many fence-sitters to finally decide to do something. To the rest of the world, including our Canadian neighbors to the north, this attitude is puzzling - the relative lack of a threat of expropriation is very nearly unique to the United States. Yet in many ways, this institution of private property is one of the reasons for the enormous liberty which lasted so long in this nation (unlike in France or the Latin American nations or even the Commonwealth nations) AND the fecundity of our economy and technology. If we do not immediately, and with very great purpose and strength resist this immoral act, we will find ourselves in the situation described in the next article: (Read the rest here)

New At The Price of Liberty!
Liberty Bloggers We Know