Extreme Capitalists

Recently someone on a forum asked a rather typical question but it interested me nonetheless, it was “What makes a Government good?” The following is my answer to that question…

To me a good Government is one that remains within its bounds. Governments have to execute power by the use of force in some form or another. The Government should be restricted to protecting its citizens rights via a court system that can overrule any democratic body through a Bill of Rights. I think this is obvious to anyone, that we need a self-limiting Government, even socialists realize this.

Yet what is the nature of a Mans rights? I prefer to think that the nature of mans rights has to be derived from reality. As human beings we are born only with volitional consciousness – to live we have to act. To survive we must act as individuals and this is something with which we are born equally – we all have this ability to act except in the rare case of a birth defect or whatnot. Yet, even a mentally challenged individual has and requires the ability to act and to think freely to attain happiness.

To act individuals need to be free from the interference of other individuals and this requires objective law and police. This also requires some form of taxes. My preferred taxation would be to treat civil law and contracts as a service requiring a fee of the individuals using it to uphold agreements in advance of dispute. Also, land taxes to protect the general population. Not paying taxes for that technically puts others at risk – so as such if the money is used honestly to fund basic policing and the military it isn’t a violation of rights but the cost of having them at all.

Also to act individuals require property rights for the obvious reason that for a person to act in the physical world they need tools and other material possessions. Without property rights a man is not free to act at all as his hands are forbidden to hold anything without permission – and any system that requires that form of permission essentially makes property of people. A system focused to the needs of a human being is one that allows an individual to gain a value through trade and keep it. We are all born with a value and that is our minds, our arms, and our legs.

The only thing socialism does is divert the effort of millions of individuals through a central body with a far more limited span of intelligence and a far slimmer view of the citizens. This is why central planners are blind and the basis of the socialist calculation problem. Whenever the Government acts it is at the expense of the people so when socialists try to reallocate wealth it diverts individuals into being taxmen rather than accountants, social workers instead of psychologists, and so on. Anyone who thinks that socialism can work is avoiding the fact that it all operates on brute force. Oh the irony when the left bitch about the Iraq War.

As Ayn Rand so eloquently and simply put it: ‘Foggy metaphors, sloppy images, unfocused poetry, and equivocations—such as “A hungry man is not free”—do not alter the fact that only political power is the power of physical coercion.’

In Australia currently there is a rise in violent crime, organized crime, theft, drug trafficking, and more. Prisons are overcrowded and so the Magistrates and Justices deal out weak punishments and fines, and people commit even more crime. Meanwhile, our police are kept busy violating people’s property rights, making the roads more dangerous because of over-policing and poor road rules that create bad driving instead of doing what they are meant to do: protect the citizens of the Commonwealth of Australia.

As a result of this drug prices are higher and so people commit theft to obtain them. The victims of these crimes often never receive any justice because instead of dealing with things like theft the police are ordered to make the drug prices higher by committing theft and property destruction (in a moral not legal sense obviously) of peoples drugs and other property in the process. Families are ripped apart and people are literally terrorized by law enforcement in the quest to stop illicit substances.

Drug users addicted to substances tend to find after police raids that prices are suddenly obscenely high while they have the same level of addiction. Crazed users of heroin and ice commit burglaries and even assaults and murders against ordinary people as a result of the state meddling with supply and demand in an area of great moral hazard.

With more resources policing drugs the value of them increasing means that crime becomes more organized and well funded.  Carl Williams certainly wouldn’t have had the means to fund the killing of competitors and rivals with ecstasy sold on the open market with all participants protected by the law. Instead, the money drug users buy their drugs with end up in the hands of a miniature feudal empire of warring dealers who then start to buy things like weapons to protect their domain.

Simply, the attitude behind the war on drugs is that to stop drugs we must use brute force and devote law enforcement resources to stealing drug dealers property and roughing them up rather than a civilized route. The legalization of substances leaves only one terrain left with which to fight: reason. The fact is that drug use is damaging to people’s health and livelihood. Cigarettes are legal and far more addictive than most other drugs yet most people manage to quit smoking entirely on their own with only the motivation of good health. I believe that most people avoid drugs regardless of their legality for the same reasons the majority of us don’t smoke and drink responsibly.

Whether people realize it or not being rational and responsible is beneficial to their own existence. Not everyone is an alcoholic because they require self-control to go about their daily business. Not everyone is a drug-addict because a drug induced state makes their other goals impossible. All of the literature regarding substance addiction from the mental health community documents substance abuse in stages of which the final stage is when a person realizes they cannot function on the substance and being without it long term is desirable. Like most smokers quit smoking despite it having immediate effects of finance and a small sacrifice in fitness, quit because they realize it’s better to live longer than be stimulated.

A real crackdown on crime would involve restoring police to protect people directly from property theft, violence, murder, rape, and fraud rather than these current misguided attempts to “prevent suffering” with a brutal campaign against drugs. Instead of protecting people from domestic crime, the police commit domestic terrorism and destruction of property. People have their homes raided and trashed while having absolutely nothing illegal in their possession. People are robbed and murdered during the attempt because the price of a substance has been raised due to police terrorizing the merchants of drugs, and people have their futures destroyed because they are dragged into crime because of the prospect of wealth provided once again by the ban on drugs.

How do we persecute someone selling a drug that routinely and randomly kills people like heroin? Murder, attempted murder, conspiracy to commit murder. There are a lot of complexities but I am not a lawyer. Ecstasy is actually one of the safest substances around, if it weren’t for the bullshit additives put in them by the drug dealers – this is fraud, because drugs are illegal, it cannot be punished. Rather than providing the inventive for people to be honest, the ban on drugs provides people with the incentive to kill people for profit.

Remove the laws forbidding the sale and possession of drugs and that entire market shall be removed from the darkness and into the sunshine. That way the real criminals from the fraudsters selling lethal ecstasy to the murderers selling heroin are punished and not the people of the Commonwealth of Australia.

I live in a country with retardedly morally-relativist progressive socialist politics. Essentially I am noticing that through the attempts at the Government endorsement of Sharia law and reconciliation with aboriginals for the crimes committed against their ancestors, along with ‘start work’ Keynesian programs to try and keep them employed by forcing producers to hire quotas of them, it wouldn’t surprise me if the World Government conspiracy nuts thought there was an orchestrated effort to make us hate one-another beyond simple culture shock.

Simply, this country cannot afford the economic stagnation that protectionism would create, nor the fact that our current runaway money supply problem only prevents being translated into inflation at the moment because we depend on imports, that import money being used to buy Government debt actually means the money printed to originally fund the debt is deleted. Our countries current rosy economic figures rest on the tyranny that is the Government Bond market (the tax rights to unborn children) and the tyranny of the rightless slaves who build our stuff overseas.

Every year Aboriginals in the northern territory get roughly $90,000 worth of benefits per head, which, being a rather barren place, have little to buy with. Most of it comes at one time, and usually its spent on a car that kills the uneducated owner or wounds them badly enough to cost even more in medical bills. The money that comes regularly can be spent usually on food and a fine wide ranging variety of entertainment goods: DVD players, TVs, pornography, alcohol, drugs, and petrol to sniff… This makes people think aboriginals are pretty stupid, yet what about the brave faced fools in Parliament? They are the ones who insist that without this money, they are bereft of any kind of luxury at all.

Yet who is stupider than the people in Parliament? Nobody other than the fools who chose to accept a creed of racism as a result of their own wrongs. John Howard tried to turn the money into basic food stamps, to at least clean the Treasuries hands of certain substance related problems, however he doubled the police state.

This is the same with Muslim hatred over the supply of Halal meat to all Children just because the socialist progressives in the Department of Education can’t handle the hate mail from a bunch of parents. Has anybody realized that even if every seat in Parliament is taken by some hard line racist like Paulene Hanson, that she has to end the tyranny that is a centrally planned education system? See, there is this other side of Big Government which is unelected: the government employees. They make all of the little decisions, voting Family First won’t save you.

I’d love to see what the progressives come up with to combat racism, probably censorship, which will just incite even more racism.

Another good question, and mind the French, why are you all so fucking stupid in the first place for me to need to write this blog? Think about this. Because you really are fucking stupid Australia, incredibly.

Simply if we had a bill of wrongs, as Steven Spadijer calls it, or a negative bill of rights as it is called – little of this would even be possible. Nobody could force you to provide for someone you don’t want to, except the only people on earth who need positive rights: children. They are the only people you are obliged to support. This is pretty simple to do though, if parents can’t afford to send their own kids to school, and for only about 4% of them would this be this poor, and I am sure charity can provide the difference.

The simple fact is school being available does not mean a one-sized fits all school system is required. Some call it religious segregation, however I call it freedom of expression and freedom of speech, along with property rights. Simply, if people want schools to cater specifically to their needs, they should just build their bloody own schools. I don’t care why they are built, only that kids learn to read, write, and use a calculator. If I were MP in this perfect world, I’d inspect them myself to see if they uphold that simple standard.

Stop this Us & Them rubbish, it could literally be the death of us.

John Tate.