Anything That's Peaceful

[mmm....shiney!]

And one more for now, the Native American irks me a bit because it's usually a tool of anti-capitalism, but anyhoo:

 

[bordsilver]

It's that time of year again, so here's another:

Gratuitous advert - The 2016 Annual Friedman Conference

Sydney, 13-16 May 2016
The Early Bird special is just $300 for concession, or $400 for adults. This is amazing value, and includes 2 full days of conference, lunches, Friday night drinks and a 3 course dinner with 4 hour wine package at the Gala Dinner.

If you were to believe most of our media, politicians and academics then you would be forgiven for thinking that what Australia needs are just a few more taxes, regulations, prohibitions, and mandates.

The steady stream of big-government rhetoric is so mainstream that many people find it hard to imagine how a free society could function.

We want to help spark that imagination.

That's why we created the Australian Libertarian Society (ALS) Friedman Conference. And I hope you will be able to join us for the Annual Conference in May this year.

For most of the year, you will probably be surrounded by people who think that freedom is a fringe idea. But for two days each year you are invited to take a short break from the statist quo, and enjoy the intellectual stimulation and friendly banter that comes from Australia's biggest libertarian conference. In May in Sydney the best and brightest libertarians (and classical liberals) of Australia will come together to swap ideas, socialise and hear from world-renowned speakers at the Annual ALS Friedman Conference.

The Australian Libertarian Society's Annual Friedman Conference is the largest free market conference in the Asia-Pacific region, and the high point of the Australian liberty calendar.

The 2016 Conference will be held in at the stylish Aerial function centre in Sydney on May 13-16. Over 300 activists, thought leaders, business representatives, and political influencers will hear from some of the best speakers from not just Australia, but around the world.

Conference speakers include North Korean escapee, human rights activist, and author Yeonmi-Park; Professor Ilya Somin of George Mason University; Lawson Bader, immediate past President of the Washington DC based Competitive Enterprise Institute, NSW Finance Minister The Hon Domenic Perrottet MP, Tom Switzer from the University of Sydney, and Professor Phil Lewis from the University of Canberra.

In three short years the ALS Friedman Conference has grown from a tentative idea into one of the most important events on the liberty calendar. In large part, that success is due to the vision and dedication of Tim Andrews' and the Australian Taxpayers Alliance, as well as the generous support of the Institute for Public Affairs, ANZ Students for Liberty, and the Mannkal Economic Education Foundation. As the liberty movement continues to grow, we look forward to the next stage of this exciting journey, and we hope that you are able to join us for the ride.

Note - the $100 early bird discount ends tomorrow.

UPDATE: By entering the code 'IPA', IPA members are entitled to a 15% discount. IPA members under 30 can get a 30% discount by entering the code 'IPA-C' (this offer is limited to 20 people).

 

[mmm....shiney!]

Chris Berg, The Libertarian Alternative, 2016:

Libertarianism is a philosophy of optimism.

There you go! Libertarians are happier people, we are optimists. While those that support the State are pessimists and are unhappy.

 

[bordsilver]

^ I bought that at the Friedman conference last weekend. Have only read the first few chapters and skim read a couple more at this stage but is quite readable. He's not just regurgitating For a New Liberty or similar. Has a large Australian flavour/context to it.

 

[mmm....shiney!]

I've just read the intro, he strikes me as a minarchist. Is that correct?

 

[bordsilver]

I've just read the intro, he strikes me as a minarchist. Is that correct?

Yes. Just your standard, traditional Libertarian pre-Rothbard I guess you could say - or Classical Liberal. He mentions the other "flavours" of Libertarianism but says that arguing about which sub-school really "owns the word" is unhelpful since every flavour has far more in common than differences.

I know that Chris is fully aware of the variants and could similarly debate all of the pros and cons of those, but I guess the purpose of this book is more to influence the nature of the political debate in Australia. Consequently this means discussing the role of government in our current world, which is to protect property rights, run a fair and accessible judicial system and provide national defence and police forces.

 

[mmm....shiney!]

Consequently this means discussing the role of government in our current world, which is to protect property rights, run a fair and accessible judicial system and provide national defence and police forces.

I'd be a happy man if by the time I die governments would be restricted to just those functions.

 

[SpacePete]

Consequently this means discussing the role of government in our current world, which is to protect property rights, run a fair and accessible judicial system and provide national defence and police forces.

I'd be a happy man if by the time I die governments would be restricted to just those functions.

That's a bigger fantasy than the Twilight movies. Governments are becoming more and more intrusive into our lives and I doubt it will change in our lifetimes.

 

[bordsilver]

Consequently this means discussing the role of government in our current world, which is to protect property rights, run a fair and accessible judicial system and provide national defence and police forces.

I'd be a happy man if by the time I die governments would be restricted to just those functions.

That's a bigger fantasy than the Twilight movies. Governments are becoming more and more intrusive into our lives and I doubt it will change in our lifetimes.

I go hot and cold on the likelihood. What ideas the millenials embrace will determine a lot as the baby boomers take more of a back seat but at this stage I think they are a confused bunch. They seem to be embracing the "sharing economy", piracy and internet etc but similarly seem to love the feel of the jack boot of government on their throats.

 

[Newtosilver]

Consequently this means discussing the role of government in our current world, which is to protect property rights, run a fair and accessible judicial system and provide national defence and police forces.

I'd be a happy man if by the time I die governments would be restricted to just those functions.

Happy to say I can not see that happening reverand

 

[mmm....shiney!]

Consequently this means discussing the role of government in our current world, which is to protect property rights, run a fair and accessible judicial system and provide national defence and police forces.

I'd be a happy man if by the time I die governments would be restricted to just those functions.

Happy to say I can not see that happening reverand

http://forums.silverstackers.com/message-918098.html#p918098

 

[bordsilver]

I'd be a happy man if by the time I die governments would be restricted to just those functions.

Happy to say I can not see that happening reverand

http://forums.silverstackers.com/message-918098.html#p918098

LOL Just one of our jackboot of Govt lovers

We want people to be allowed to do peaceful things?! The horror. We need the government to take an inordinate interest in what we are doing in our bedrooms or with our bodies when we wish to go out and restrict it. People might be having FUN while doing things :O

 

[mmm....shiney!]

People might be having FUN while doing things :O

Or, worse still, they might start thinking for themselves.

 

[Newtosilver]

People might be having FUN while doing things :O

Or, worse still, they might start thinking for themselves.

People do not need to think for themselves when they have you shoving crap down their throats endlessly reverand

 

[mmm....shiney!]

People do not need to think for themselves when they have you shoving crap down their throats endlessly reverand

Being a libertarian I'd always ask for their permission first.

 

[phrenzy]

imagine a boot stamping a human face forever...

Seriously though I think the priorities of the generation I've got half a foot in are different. I think they seem to reject labels of any kind. You don't need a defined political construct to call the sort sort of horrific videos coming out of the middle east as dickish and people who should be stopped.

Same goes for governmental overreach.

I think there's plenty of change coming that will crystallize and make these vague thoughts more concrete. But they are open to change and equality and that hasn't been defined as a codified ism yet, which means that it doesn't have to be Sanders or Trump.

There's simply no telling how technology, the coming fiscal reckoning, rise of the east, energy challenges and opportunities and any other number of things will turn everything on it's head.

Confinement fusion gets cracked abs the world changes over night. I don't think there's been a more flexible generation in history better able to deal with the changes it would bring. On the other hand it leaves much to be desired if things turn ugly.

 

[mmm....shiney!]

There's simply no telling how technology, the coming fiscal reckoning, rise of the east, energy challenges and opportunities and any other number of things will turn everything on it's head.

Well said.

 

[mmm....shiney!]

That other thread seems to have been deleted, and fair enough too.

Many opponents of libertarianism have misconceptions about it, and one of the most common accusations is that it is a utopian ideal. This was my response to that charge levelled at libertarianism from Roswell Crash Survivor, I thought I'd post it here seeing as the other thread has gone.

You are insinuating you understand the essence of Libertarianism better than David Boaz's? The height of your arrogance is truly astounding.

David Boaz doesn't have a monopoly on libertarian thought. That aside, why he chose to use the term "Utopia" in the article you cited is something that Boaz himself would have to explain. I'd say any reference to a utopia in any literature, whether it is libertarian, socialist or religious is used to describe a social structure that is harmonious, or at least more harmonious than any current reality. Religious teachings aside, most political theorists, possibly even Marx and Engels themselves would acknowledge that perfection is unattainable. This is the meaning of utopia, perfection, and when it is wielded as an accusation by opponents against whatever philosophy is being tested, it is used as it is defined ie a state of perfection, when clearly every rational man and his co-rational thinking dog knows and acknowledges perfection is unattainable. My guess is that Boaz uses the term "Utopia" as shorthand for "the benefits of limited government and devolution of power."

From Boaz himself:

My ideal community would probably not be your utopia. The attempt to create heaven on earth is doomed to fail, because we have different ideas of what heaven would be like. As society becomes more diverse, the possibility of agreeing on one plan for a whole nation or the whole world becomes even more remote. And in any case, we can't possibly anticipate the changes that progress will bring. Utopian plans always involve a static and rigid vision of the ideal community, and such a vision cannot accommodate a dynamic world. We can no more imagine what civilization will be like a century from now than the people of 1900 could have imagined today's civilization. What we need is not utopia, but a free society in which people can design their own communities.

I've tried to explain that your charge that libertarianism is some Utopian ideal is in fact fallacious, libertarians are not deluded into thinking that they can create an ideal society. Libertarianism is not some magical cure that will solve all the social or personal problems of the world. I'd recommend you move on, and if you'd really like to debate the ideas that libertarians hold to come up with some rational arguments against what we really think, not what you fallaciously attribute to us.

 

[Newtosilver]

Why is it fair enough the other thread was deleted? Just curious?

 

[mmm....shiney!]

Why is it fair enough the other thread was deleted? Just curious?

Consider the corporate perspective ie the owners of this site and any impact upon their business interests because of the nature of some of the posts.

Edit to add: or even more simply, the owners don't want to listen to that shit.