Thatcher's Defense of the Free Market

Offalycool

silverharp wrote: »

you wont agree with the sentiment of this article excerpt:D, but it seems to come down to promise and delivery. you will probably retort that the same applies to Libertarianism:pac:

There is no law without force. With the creation of the state the law that existed prior was violated and overthrown through violent force by the people. Thereby the people create and are responsible for the state. After the creation of the 'just' state, the state maintains its dominion through violence, it retains the absolute right to use violence on behalf of the people. If the state fails in its obligations to the people the people will destroy the state. In order that the state remain stable justice must be respected. If there is injustice in the state (and there always is) it is the responsibility of its citizen to try to address the injustice. The libertarians suppose that monopolistic imbalance is due to compromise, and justice is to be found in law. Law can never be a substitute for justice because justice is an ideal, therefore the law must be open to change in a just society. As Blaise Pascal remarked, “It is right that what is strong should be made just, it is necessary that what is strong must be followed.” The state draws its power from the people and it is the peoples responsibility to make the state just, the state can only retain real power, that is the power of the people; if it is just.

Offalycool

I thought this point of view might be of interest to people who would like to try libertarianism out for themselves.. :pac:

Democracy For $ale:
Libertarian Paradise
DR. JACK MILLER / Monitor Winter 2004-05 20feb2005



The United States has the lowest taxes and smallest government of any industrial nation (as a percent of Gross Domestic Product). After years of huge tax cuts for wealthy elites and corporations, government at all levels is struggling to meet public needs.

Nevertheless, with services being slashed, infra-structure crumbling and deficits soaring, demands continue for smaller government and lower taxes. A key player in this process is arch-libertarian Grover Norquist—the most powerful man you never heard of in Washington. He runs the well-funded Americans for Tax Reform, and his goal is to shrink government to the point "you can drown it in a bathtub." Norquist's ideal citizen is "the self-employed, home schooling, IRA-owning guy with a concealed-carry permit because that per-son doesn't need the goddamn government for any-thing.'" Norquist has made a living of bashing anything with the word "public" attached, and his message heavily influences the Bush administration and resonates with many anti-government Americans.

Democracy For $ale: Libertarian Paradise DR. JACK MILLER / Monitor Winter 2004-05 20feb2005

Well, I've done some research and have great news for Grover and his followers. I actually found a place where the government has already been "drowned in a bathtub—"a tax-free paradise awaiting any libertarian who cares to travel a little: Somalia! That's right! Located in picturesque East Africa, caressed by the warm waters of the Indian Ocean, Somalia has no functioning government, so there's no one to steal your hard-earned dollars.

Well, almost no one—since there are no police, the warlords sort of call the shots (no pun intended). They may demand some tribute, but it's not like wasting your money on police protection, garbage collection, sidewalks, schools, libraries, clean water, etc. Think about it: by paying tribute you're getting something really personal in return—your life! Don't despair—if the war-lord even leaves you fifty bucks, you'll still be a Somali millionaire. According to the CIA, "The absence of central government authority, as well as profiteering from counterfeiting, has rapidly debased Somalia's currency" to where one U.S. dollar now buys 30,000 Somali shillings!"

Also, if you arrive by sea, be careful. Somalia has no tax-supported Coast Guard, so our State Department advises that there are real live pirates who keep a sharp lookout for over-upholstered, spoiled libertarians (like Grover) to snatch for ransom. At the risk of seeming wimpy, you might want to check the "Weekly Piracy Report" on the International Chamber of Commerce's web site before sailing."'

Arrhh, matey, if you are kidnapped, the closest U.S. Embassy is in Nairobi, Kenya! But who cares? Since embassies are another symptom of bloated tax-hungry governments, self-respecting libertarians will gladly walk the plank before submitting to any such official meddling. That may not become a problem, anyway, because you can hit the beach heavily armed (remember, no gun laws). In fact, no laws at all! No patronizing, nosey officials to keep you from doing absolutely anything you want to do.

With no public health system or sanitation in Somalia, malaria, tuberculosis, tetanus and leprosy may become a problem for even the tidiest libertarian. Try to limit your contact with the waterways; no wading or swimming is suggested, but of course, not ordered. The inland waters are a veritable toxic brew of microbes, which cause cholera, hepatitis, typhoid, dysentery, and several other ailments not routinely found in brutally high-tax areas. Don't despair, there is good news! According to our tax-supported Centers for Disease Control, at least one pesky parasite, the blood fluke, dislikes salt water and only bores through tender, libertarian skin exposed to fresh water in'and. Whew! That means the warm waters of the Indian Ocean off Somalia are blood fluke-free—so enjoy!

While frolicking in the Indian Ocean there is one minor concern: Since Somalia has no tax-supported Navy to patrol its shoreline, foreign ships routinely dump highly toxic waste into the coastal waters. According to the BBC, a massive fish kill a couple years ago was caused by nuclear waste freely off-loaded into Somalia's territorial waters. Well, a quick dip shouldn't hurt—a slight bodily glow at worst. Most of the locals don't have to worry very long about such inconveniences since the average person only lives 46 years.

Remember to take along a powerful radio since the public telecommunications system was completely destroyed during the last civil war. If another freedom lover, say a bandit, liberates your powerful radio, you can currently make international connections from the capitol, Mogadishu, by satellite.

When you visit Mogadishu to send your message, plan on doing some walking. According to the UN, "No car, no bus, no heavily armed jeep can make its way through this Mogadishu road block: only goats and pedestrians attempt to climb the huge mound of rubbish—a solid mass.'"

Highway travel is possible elsewhere. The country's principle highway is a 700-mile two-lane paved road from Chisimayu to Hargeysa. Don't worry about getting stuck at a railroad crossing since there are no railroads in Somalia. Drive on whatever side of the road suits your mood! Hey, pedal to the metal, but keep yourfingers crossed because the northern segment of the highway still needs to be cleared of land mines. Links to neighboring countries are mostly dirt trails and tend to be impassable in rainy weather.

So there you are: a country about the size of Texas where you can roam free. Free from the Nanny-State, un-mined highways, laws, police, paramedics, telephones, museums, schools, clean water, libraries, hospitals, sanitation, old-age and most of all—free from taxes! Bon voyage, you lucky libertarians, and don't for-get to write. Oops! I forgot—there are no post offices there, either.

Dr. Jack Miller is Coordinator of the Indiana Alliance for Democracy.
Monitor is a publication of the Indianapolis-based Hoosier Environmental Council

1.

Michael Scherer, "The Soul of the New Machine", Mother Jones, Jan/Feb, 2004
2.

http://worldfacts.us/Somalia.htm
3.

Canadian Dept. of Foreign Affairs Travel Report 4-19-01
4.

http://unsomalia.org/sectors/health_nutrition/stories/20001221.htm

Source.

fugazied

The problem is thinking people have already examined the true free market experiements in Chile and in Russia under Yeltsin. Without exception they were failures. Many people starved, they suffered massive inflation and when the markets settled, there were a LOT more people in poverty and a lot more billionaires in the those countries. They were plundered by greedy capitalists and the market didn't provide solutions for feeding the poorest in the society or giving them jobs.

As for libertarianism, the desire for small efficient government is admirable, but selling off all of the public assets to corporations leaves the governments in a vulnerable position to corporations at the moment in my opinion. We have to remember most of the governments are broke, particularly the US government. They have been through a period of intence economic rationalism, selling off profitable industries to corporations. If they continue to sell off countries' infrastructure how long until police and military are privatised? The US already uses mercenaries in Iraq. Once the government is fully privatised they will become talking heads for corporations, and libertarianism could facilitate this through it's small government idealogue. It's too much power in their hands.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

getonyourboots

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

When is the next meeting of the Donegal Thatcherite Society?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Amberman

The Corinthian wrote: »

Unfortunately the problem with being moralistic is that you need to be prepared to have blood on your hands to achieve it.

Corinthian...can you please elaborate on what you mean by this.

The Corinthian

Amberman wrote: »

Corinthian...can you please elaborate on what you mean by this.

Classic example is the cure that was derived from unethical research. To employ such a cure would be morally wrong, however if one follows one's moral convictions in this, people would end up suffering when a cure could be administered.

Propping up the banks by, for example, guaranteeing deposit accounts (and such a guarantee lessens their debt exposure) is actually immoral in light of their irresponsible behaviour - it rewards the unjust and incompetent. However, not doing so would lead to their collapse and with that collapse the loss of deposits belonging to many innocents.

Belfast

Offalycool wrote: »

Correct me if I’m wrong but Margaret Thatcher was essentially a libertarian. Libertarianism is unjustified when you consider that it places absolute importance in private property. The libertarian state is essentially a very weak state, everything except the police and army are privately owned. This is seen as a defence of the libertarian’s freedom from an inherently corrupt state and the best way to get productive use of the earth’s resources. However Libertarians cannot justify why some people should have legitimate claim over resources when clearly these resources were taken by force at some point in the past. Furthermore there is no legitimate claim to own the world and pass this world to only their own children whilst denying poorer people and their children any claim to the earth.

Margaret Thatcher was not a Libertarian.

The Corinthian

Belfast wrote: »

Margaret Thatcher was not a Libertarian.

Do you actually know what a Libertarian is?

Belfast

The Corinthian wrote: »

Do you actually know what a Libertarian is?

Yes.

A good example of a Libertarian is Ron Paul Member of the U.S. House of Representatives
from Texas's 14th district.
the link below give the policies of the American libertarian party.
http://www.lp.org/platform

The Corinthian

Then why do you think Thatcher was not?

Belfast

The Corinthian wrote: »

Then why do you think Thatcher was not?

Mrs thatcher did every little to increase personnel liberty.
She trampled on civil liberties.
Still no written constitution in the UK to give people in the UK rights.
She did nothing to stop the rigged housing market (through planning permission) in the UK or stop the housing boom of the 1980's
She did not restore the gold standard or sliver standard or get rid of fiat money.
She did not get rid of income tax. before the early 1900s Britain did not have income tax.
She did not end the government role in trying to manage the economy.
She did not end the probation on drugs or prostitution.
She did not reform the justice system in the UK to make criminals responsible to compensating the victims of their crimes.
She did not close down the NHS in the UK
She did not end subsidies to the Nuclear industry and many other state subsidies to other industries or business etc.
She did not close down the welfare state.
She did not get rid of all state owned business.
She did not give the UK a small Libertarian government.
She removed power from local government and gave it to central government.
libertarian should decrease the power of central government not increase it.
She did not pay off the National Debt.
She did not return Britain to world wide free trade.
She did not end immigration control.

There are other things she should have done if she were a libertarian, but the list is long enough already.

Mrs Thatcher did move Britain a little closer to a free market, But that does not make her a Libertarian.

"Libertarianism is a philosophy. The basic premise of libertarianism is that each individual should be free to do as he or she pleases so long as he or she does not harm others. In the libertarian view, societies and governments infringe on individual liberties whenever they tax wealth, create penalties for victimless crimes, or otherwise attempt to control or regulate individual conduct which harms or benefits no one except the individual who engages in it."