Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Actually, looking at Wikiquote it seems likely that as his paranoia about totalitarianism advanced so did his fundamentalism about "freedom". He's credited with influencing both Thatcher's and Reagan's little experiments.

The Constitution of Liberty is due to be republished in September. Maybe their secrets will be found there.

by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Wed Aug 2nd, 2006 at 11:07:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I think the name of the game is Anarcho-capitalism.

Nothing is 'mere'. — Richard P. Feynman
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Aug 2nd, 2006 at 11:13:51 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Maybe not, exactly:

One social structure that is not permissible under anarcho-capitalism is one that attempts to claim greater sovereignty than the individuals that form it. The state is a prime example, but another is the modern corporation -- defined as a legal entity that exists under a different legal code than individuals as a means to shelter the individuals who own and run the corporation from possible legal consequences of acts by the corporation. It is worth noting that Rothbard allows a narrower definition of a corporation: "Corporations are not at all monopolistic privileges; they are free associations of individuals pooling their capital. On the purely free market, such men would simply announce to their creditors that their liability is limited to the capital specifically invested in the corporation ...."[9] However, this is a very narrow definition that only shelters owners from debt by creditors that specifically agree to the arrangement; it also does not shelter other liability, such as from malfeasance or other wrongdoing.
by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Wed Aug 2nd, 2006 at 11:17:05 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Minarchism, maybe?
Prominent minarchists include Benjamin Constant, Herbert Spencer, Leonard Read, Ludwig von Mises, Friedrich Hayek, James M. Buchanan, Milton Friedman, Ayn Rand, John Hospers, Robert Nozick, George Reisman.

Nothing is 'mere'. — Richard P. Feynman
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Aug 2nd, 2006 at 11:29:03 AM EST
[ Parent ]
"Government should be just big enough to do what we want it to do."
by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Wed Aug 2nd, 2006 at 11:33:53 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I could agree with that.

For me, it becomes a debate between left libertarianism and right libertarianism. Neither is free of the risk of degenerating into authoritarian versions in practice.

Nothing is 'mere'. — Richard P. Feynman

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Aug 2nd, 2006 at 11:37:30 AM EST
[ Parent ]
There's a historical diary waiting to be written here about how the oil-bust economic melt-down of the 70s combined with what many saw as excessive union power produced a right-wing freebooting capitalist-fundamentalist backlash.

Specifically - Thatcher and Reagan and their peculiar ideas about deregulation.

Once the media were deregulated, it was easy for Murdoch to start spreading his poison and acting as king maker, and for other corporate interests to follow suit. In the UK the miners' strike and the move to Wapping were two big battles in the subsequent class war.

There's also been a lot of influence in the US from frankly wacko billionaires such as Scaife and his Scaife Foundations which have effectively treated US government as a personal for-profit organisation.

There are two levels here. At the Scaife level it's deliberate manipulation of opinion and policy for personal gain. At the lower level there are numerous emotionally stunted chancers and wannabes who love the greed-is-good amorality of freebooting capitalism, and feel that paying taxes is a personal insult.

Under those two levels there's a majority of people who want a quiet life without lethal but stupid panto-wars and crusades, and with a reasonable standard of living offering basics such as education and health care.

The deeper social problem is that the most violently aggressive billionaires and promoters of corporate excellence really do have serious psychological problems. Scaife, Coors and Bush are all former or current alcoholics, and cocaine is the drug of choice among the executive class - so much so that it's considered part of the scenery.

Sane policies are impossible while these people continue to have any significant social influence.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Wed Aug 2nd, 2006 at 01:15:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]


Top Diaries

Occasional Series