Archive for March, 2008

Ruwarchy 2.0

Thursday, March 27th, 2008

I’ve created a monster!

A monster of a name, anyway: Ruwarchy! It’s inspired Less Antman to give his unofficial Ruwart site that name.

Mary Ruwart While obviously prompted by Mary Ruwart’s announcement of her presidential bid, Ruwarchy.com isn’t specifically a Ruwart campaign site; it’s more of an all-things-Ruwart site, and indeed seems deliberately designed to be welcoming to libertarians who reject electoral politics. The site proclaims itself a forum for “those who want to advance the pure libertarian ideas Dr. Ruwart champions in whatever way they choose,” and there’s even a section of the website devoted to “non-party activism.” Moreover, Antman has argued elsewhere that even anti-electoral libertarians have reason to welcome her campaign, on the grounds that “it should improve sales of her books,” and “since neither book actively promotes voting or politics, this will aid the entire movement, including those who reject political campaigning as a persuasion technique.”

But there’s plenty of stuff for partyarchs too, including a section devoted to overturning the 2006 gutting of the LP platform.

In the meantime, the official Ruwart campaign site is being run by the hardline anti-electoral Brad Spangler. Go figure.

I suspect anti-electorals will have especially mixed feelings about Ruwart’s candidacy. On the one hand, she’s promoting a much more radical form of libertarianism than Ron Paul is; on the other, for that very reason she’s more likely than Paul to lure potential anti-electorals into electoral politics.

Ruwart’s campaign will also be an interesting test of how much radicalism is left in the LP. If someone like Barr or Gravel beats Ruwart to the nomination that would probably be a sign that it’s lost its soul irretrievably.

forum.leftlibertarian.org is up!

Thursday, March 27th, 2008

I’m pleased to announce that the long delayed leftlibertarian.org forum has finally been set up! If you already have an account on here, it should translate to the forum. If you don’t have an account, it’s simple to create one. Please let me know what you think!

Chile Part 5 - More Failures of Neoliberalism

Thursday, March 27th, 2008

In the fifth part of his report on social conditions in Chile, Larry Gambone at Porcupine Blog takes a more general look at current problems and the after-effects of the Pinochet dictatorship.

I have already touched on the problem of rapid economic growth coupled with price inflation and wage stagnation. (With the exception of the 1998 Asian Tigers Crisis, GDP growth has averaged between 5 and 10% annually. (1) ) I also referred to the grotesque level of inequality, one of the worst in the world (2), and the refusal of the government to create proper social welfare and education systems in an attempt to rectify this. But there are more problems than these facing Chile.

An export-dependent economy. What happens when the global economy goes into the toilet? What will happen to Chile in the coming years when the rising oil prices make it uneconomic to export fruit?

The central part of the country where most of the population lives and most of the fruit growing occurs is drying up and may well become desert in the coming decade. Due to global warming, the Andes get less snow, lowering the water table and river flow. Furthermore, clear-cutting and poor water usage are contributing factors, Chileans have told me.(Yet, you read not a word about global warming in the Chilean press.)

Chile has almost no oil and natural gas. This at a time when prices for these resources are sky-rocketing. Power brown-outs are blamed upon Argentina's refusal to renew its natural gas export contract, as it seems that country needs its gas for its own use. And since there is less water, hydro projects don't seem to be the answer. The electricity problem is a fine example of the failure of neo-liberalism. Central and North Chile get sun 365 days a year. The coastline gets wind off the Pacific. You would think solar and wind power would have been introduced. But no, Chile is 30 years behind other countries in this technology. Utlities were corporatized under Pinocho and thus cannot see any further than this years profit margins.

Meanwhile, the authorities have applied the US model of suburban sprawl and vast shopping malls everywhere. (It was never so evident as this trip, and the disease was only beginning in 1996.) At a time of water and power shortages and rising oil prices, the most energy-inefficient way of living in the world is being actively promoted.

Agribusiness is driving campesinos off the land. They crowd into the cities and exacerbate the problems there. The remaining campesinos are being forced into mono-crop sub-contracting for the corporations. This further undermines campesino life and threatens the farmer's markets, the one source of cheaper food for the populace.

The inability of the Peruvian state to deal with its economic problems is forcing many Peruvians to immigrate (legally and illegally) into Chile, a country that is wealthy by comparison with theirs. The Peruvians add to the number of poor in the cities and due to racism are blamed for "stealing jobs." and a rising crime rate.

I am left with the feeling that these problems will tear the country apart in the coming years.

One final point that I didn't know where to fit in. Chile used to be one of the most socially progressive countries in Latin America. Thanks to the Pinochet dictatorship, this is no longer the case. It was a deliberate policy of the dictatorship to stamp out socially progressive ideas and it shows. Chile is in many ways like stepping back 40 years. "White" Chileans will cheerfully tell you that People of Color are inferior and that Indians are stupid, the sort of talk that went out of style among middle class Canadians a good while ago. Even though blonds only make up maybe 15% of the population, most women in advertisements are rubias. There are no women bus, taxi or truck drivers and no women tradespeople or construction workers. Only 30% of Chilean women are engaged in wage work, the lowest in Latin America and the same as Canada in 1960. This dependence upon one income is a contributing aspect of the poverty in the country and is a direct and long-term expression of the social reaction of the Pinochet regime.

1.) Average GDP growth between 1990 and 2001 was 4.7% Average growth, 2002-2007 was 4.71% (2007 at 5.2%) Sources, CIA Fact Book

2.) The GINI Index. Zero would equal absolute equality and 100 absolute inequality. Chile stands at 58.3, Costa Rica 48.9, Brazil, 56.7, and by way of comparison, Canada at 33.1, France at 32.3 and Norway at 25.7. Sources CIA Fact Book

Some tips for MA activists.

Thursday, March 27th, 2008

I have already discussed decon strategies at length, but in this entry I want to give some specific tips borne from experience: a number of things that should always be trotting in your mind when you’re approaching people- online or in real life- and trying to decon them or persuade them of a specific point.

1. Never defend, always attack.

It’s very easy for a statist to engage you into a labyrinth of objections and hypotheticals. And no doubt you can answer all of those. But that’s not the point: by the time you’re done, your main points will all be forgotten, and weak points in your rebuttals are all that the statist (and other people watching) will remember. Such a tactic is pointless, regardless of what side you argue.

Instead, you must never be afraid to take the initiative. Let them answer your objections. After all, their position is a lot more questionable than yours. Leave the questions hanging on their side, not yours, and use the results to drive home your main points, which brings me to the next tip…

2. Always come back to morality.

Coming back to moral principles should be an integral part of every answer you give or every point you raise, especially if you are talking about peripheral issues. You should always be thinking of using what you’re saying to prove a point about morality. This will make the overall ideas behind your position more salient and keep you from getting mired into side issues (thus reinforcing tip 1 as well).

Here is an example. You are making a case for MA, and someone asks you “Well, in an Anarchy, wouldn’t a new State just emerge anyway? So what’s the point?” Of course you should discuss the fact that natural monopolies have never happened, that there’s no realistic scenario by which that would happen, that we need to teach people to overcome their brainwashing and fulfill their own values, and so on. But you always need to think of a way to come back to moral principles, and you can do this by pointing out all the evils that supporting the State entails. The point is that we must make a stand to eradicate war, legitimized crime, extortion, and so on and so forth, which you can then bring back to the universality principle.

3. Never attack groupthink.

Unless you want to waste your time, never try to decon against groupthink, because it is utterly and completely useless. Groups of believer reinforce each other’s prejudice, and will not permit you to get far. Only when talking to them one-on-one can we get them to stop relying on this reinforcement and to be a little more honest (if not completely).

4. Know the arguments.

If you’re going to stick to theory as much as possible, you need to know your theory. You need to be especially familiar with the universality argument, but a good knowledge of the others is also very useful. Here is a list of arguments that I wrote, and here is a list of quotes by past Anarchist thinkers detailing these or similar arguments (scroll down to “Arguments for Anarchy”).

5. Never mislead or claim to know what you don’t.

I hope I don’t need to tell anyone this, but thanks to the Internet anyone can find data about anything, so if you make any claim about real-life results, make sure you’re saying something backed by data.

6. Practice.

Come join us on the board or on Skype and practice, practice, practice! After all, it does make perfect. The more you practice, the more effortless your arguing will be.

Chile Part 5 - More Failures of Neoliberalism

Thursday, March 27th, 2008

I have already touched on the problem of rapid economic growth coupled with price inflation and wage stagnation. (With the exception of the 1998 Asian Tigers Crisis, GDP growth has averaged betweeen 5 and 10% annually. (1) ) I also referred to the grotesque level of inequality, one of the worst in the world (2), and the refusal of the government to create proper social welfare and education systems in an attempt to rectify this. But there are more problems than these facing Chile.

An export-dependent economy. What happens when the global economy goes into the toilet? What will happen to Chile in the coming years when the rising oil prices make it uneconomic to export fruit?

The central part of the country where most of the population lives and most of the fruit growing occurs is drying up and may well become desert in the coming decade. Due to global warming, the Andes get less snow, lowering the water table and river flow. Furthermore, clear-cutting and poor water usage are contributing factors, Chileans have told me.(Yet, you read not a word about global warming in the Chilean press.)

Chile has almost no oil and natural gas. This at a time when prices for these resources are sky-rocketing. Power brown-outs are blamed upon Argentina's refusal to renew its natural gas export contract, as it seems that country needs its gas for its own use. And since there is less water, hydro projects don't seem to be the answer. The electricity problem is a fine example of the failure of neo-liberalism. Central and North Chile get sun 365 days a year. The coastline gets wind off the Pacific. You would think solar and wind power would have been introduced. But no, Chile is 30 years behind other countries in this technology. Utlities were corporatized under Pinocho and thus cannot see any further than this years profit margins.

Meanwhile, the authorities have applied the US model of suburban sprawl and vast shopping malls everywhere. (It was never so evident as this trip, and the disease was only beginning in 1996.) At a time of water and power shortages and rising oil prices, the most energy-inefficient way of living in the world is being actively promoted.

Agribusiness is driving campesinos off the land. They crowd into the cities and exacerbate the problems there. The remaining campesinos are being forced into mono-crop sub-contracting for the corporations. This further undermines campesino life and threatens the farmer's markets, the one source of cheaper food for the populace.

The inability of the Peruvian state to deal with its economic problems is forcing many Peruvians to immigrate (legally and illegally) into Chile, a country that is wealthy by comparison with theirs. The Peruvians add to the number of poor in the cities and due to racism are blamed for "stealing jobs." and a rising crime rate.

I am left with the feeling that these problems will tear the country apart in the coming years.

One final point that I didn't know where to fit in. Chile used to be one of the most socially progressive countries in Latin America. Thanks to the Pinochet dictatorship, this is no longer the case. It was a deliberate policy of the dictatorship to stamp out socially progressive ideas and it shows. Chile is in many ways like stepping back 40 years. "White" Chileans will cheerfully tell you that People of Color are inferior and that Indians are stupid, the sort of talk that went out of style among middle class Canadians a good while ago. Even though blonds only make up maybe 15% of the population, most women in advertisements are rubias. There are no women bus, taxi or truck drivers and no women tradespeople or contruction workers. Only 30% of Chilean women are engaged in wage work, the lowest in Latin America and the same as Canada in 1960. This dependence upon one income is a contributing aspect of the poverty in the country and is a direct and long-term expression of the social reaction of the Pinochet regime.

1.) Average GDP growth between 1990 and 2001 was 4.7% Average growth, 2002-2007 was 4.71% (2007 at 5.2%) Sources, CIA Fact Book

2.) The GINI Index. Zero would equal absolute equality and 100 absolute inequality. Chile stands at 58.3, Costa Rica 48.9, Brazil, 56.7, and by way of comparison, Canada at 33.1, France at 32.3 and Norway at 25.7. Sources CIA Fact Book



Vote War No More

Thursday, March 27th, 2008

If you’d like to add your signature to a statement saying “I will only vote for or support federal candidates who publicly commit to a speedy end to the Iraq war, and to preventing future ‘wars of aggression’,” click here.

Nonvoters take notice: given the logic of “only,” this pledge means merely that you won’t vote for candidates who don’t meet this test, not that you will vote for some candidate who does – so you can sign with a clear conscience.

And no, I don’t know why “wars of aggression” is in scare-quotes.

My anti-political to-do list

Thursday, March 27th, 2008

Note to self — I need to sit down and compare Roderick Long’s 2006 anarchist defense of voting with Wendy McElroy’s lecture “The Immorality of Voting” (mp3) given at the University of Wisconsin at Madison last month.

Selling Anarchy

Thursday, March 27th, 2008

Those so inclined can now watch my ASC presentation plugging the Anarchism/Minarchism book. (I haven’t actually watched the thing; I see plenty of myself already.)

Farewell to “Jericho”

Thursday, March 27th, 2008
Jericho finished its second and final season on CBS Tuesday night. It was a darn good show while it lasted, and it was getting better all the time. I stayed faithful through its run and was delighted that the network gave the program another shot with a seven-episode mini-season after first canceling it last year. And kudos to the creators and producers, who, anticipating a second cancellation, filmed a dandy concluding episode that pretty satisfactorily tied up most of the story threads. Now those of us who give a damn can treasure all 29 shows as a complete Jericho saga; I’m assuming the short second season will arrive on DVD eventually.

By the way, for those unfamiliar with the program, Jericho’s first season detailed a massive nuclear attack on the U.S. and the painful rebuilding of Jericho, Kansas; this last run of the series focused on the town’s occupation by the “new” federal government’s military forces. And Tuesday’s episode closed with the nation on the brink of a New American Revolution, with one of its final images being the good old Gadsden flag (“Don’t Tread On Me”) flying over city hall. Stirring stuff. If you haven’t seen Jericho yet, rent or even buy the DVDs. It’s a damn fine yarn.

A (Not So) Random Proposition

Wednesday, March 26th, 2008
Capital requires labor to be productive - labor does not require capital to be productive.

Obviously, in the world of science fiction, one can imagine self-replicating robots that engage in production, but we're not there yet (if it is even possible). And regardless, when thinking of such a scenario, I'm reminded of Agent Smith's speech to Morpheus in the Matrix - (paraphrasing) "I say 'your' civilization, because after we stated making everything for you, it became 'our' civilization, didn't it?" Do we really want such a world where everything meaningful is done by robots?

Anyway, the sentence at the top is probably controversial. So let me hear it. What's wrong with it?

Or, if you can't find fault with it, give me what you think those two facts imply about how a free market might operate. When I get a few spare moments, I hope to elaborate on why I think they lead me to doubt the productivity of capital in a free market.