Posts Tagged ‘Free-market’

Arizona’s SB 1062: Here Come the Racists

February 25, 2014

Arizona’s SB 1062 is an unlawful, and probably unConstitutional, Racist attempt to overthrow the laws of the United States, which forbid discriminating in business based on race, color, creed, etc. and now so-called sexual orientation.

Now, Silverwolf discussed in detail in his blog, “Is It Constitutional in America to Discriminate in a Business?: An Internal Debate”, https://lobobreed.wordpress.com/2013/08/05/is-it-legal-in-america-to-discriminate-in-a-business-an-internal-debate/, whether it was Consitutional and/or legal to discriminate in business, and he went through an entire series of arguments and counter=arguments with himself, finally arriving at the conclusion that it was indeed illegal. Why?

It is illegal simply because businesses advertise their products priced in U.S. dollars, that is, Federal Reserve Notes. Now, it says on those notes that they are legal tender for all debts, public and private, and thus, if someone operates a business, and offers a good or service priced in U.S. dollars, then they must accept your legal tender note, since the government has promised you already that such a note is legal tender for any private debt, which is the price of the goods or service. Thus, the seller would be forced to accept these notes if he has offered goods or services to the public, either by being open for business, placing his prices in his windows or attached to the items in the store, or advertising them in the media. They are publicly offered debts, and in a real sense, that person has offered a contract to all comers that he will trade his good or service for their Federal Reserve Notes. To refuse to serve them would be to Violate a Contract, which is a Crime in both theoretical Libertarian doctrine and actual U.S. Law. This would be true even if the note was an old Silver or Gold Certificate note, backed by precious metal. (However, if the person paid in Silver or Gold Coinage, then they might well be able to discriminate, but that is another legal discussion, and here we are dealing solely with Federal Reserve Notes. But we’re certain, given the “dedication” and religous purity of these people who don’t want to do business with Gays, that if they were running a Restaurant that served $300 dinners, and a Gay wanted to purchase a dinner and pay his bill in $20 Gold pieces or Silver Dollars, that they would steadfastly refuse them service — that’s how religiously dedicated and pure they are.And we’re sure that if they suddenly needed emergency medical assistance and were rushed to a doctor, and the doctor was a Muslim, and refused on religious grounds to treat, or even touch, the sinful flesh of any non-Muslim, that they would understand, and respect his Religious Liberties, and die quickly.)

Now the so-called Conservative Group that is advocating this anti-Capitalist Law, the Center for Arizona Policy, states “SB 1062 seeks to ensure that state laws that violate the religious liberties of private persons cannot be enforced simply because the government is not technically a party to the case.”

But that “the government is not technically a party to the case” is precisely a big whopping Lie, as we have illustrated above. The Federal goverment is a party to the case, because it says on the Federal Reserve Note that the Federal government says this is a legal tender note that can be used to service any private debt anywhere in America, regardless of in what State, and the seller of the goods or service is refusing to accept what the Federal government has ordered him to accept if he is going to price his goods and services in U.S. Dollars. So the government is right in the midst of the trade, and is thus very clearly a party to the case. The contract they promised to the bearer was violated by the seller, and thus the seller must be punished under Law.

Now, if the seller could price his goods or services in, say, Swiss Francs or conch shells or ounces of tea, then perhaps the seller might be able to legally discriminate in his business, but this again is a different political theory question, and alternate currencies are viewed with askance by the U.S. Treasury and the government, although in a Libertarian Free-Market Society we should be able to price or purchase items in whatever currencies we, the buyer and seller, can agree on. If we think the Zimbabwean Shilling is sounder than the U.S. Dollar, then we should, in a Libertarian Society, be able to conduct our Free Market in whatever currency we choose. That would be a truly Free Market, and will come in the Future. But, here and now in America, if you price something in U.S. Dollars, and publicly advertise it, the buyer should be able to settle the debt in U.S. Dollars, whomever they are, and the government must guarantee that reality.

And finally, if your religous liberties make it impossible for you to conduct your business in America in Federal Reserve Notes, as under current law, then you’re always free to not start a business that will violate those liberties, and your always free to seek your living in some other manner, or starve to death. (Oh, we forgot, there are food stamps even for Racists, paid for by some poor Black working stiff.)

This Bill is nothing but a Communist-Racist attempt to instill that Ol’ Southern Segregation in the midst of Arizona.The Governor of Arizona should lob a big lunger of Libertarian Free Market Spit on this unAmerican Bill, and veto it.

If the Governor signs the Bill, all Free Market non-Racist Americans should use that grand old Irish Free-Market weapon: the Boycott, and Boycott Arizona. Don’t go there, and don’t buy their products.

If the Governor signs the Bill, then, as they used to say in the ghetto, “Boycott, Baby, Boycott!”

Hooooooooooooooooooowwwwwwwwwwww — Silverwolf

The Paranoia of Absolute Power: From King John to Modern America

June 26, 2013

It seems that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Thomas Jefferson and James Madison were, unfortunately, dead right. ‘Twould be much better if absolute power made the Chief into a benevolent angel, using his power for moral ends, to better the lives of the people in one way or another, if only to get out of their way.

In the future perfect Capitalist society, where the industrious will happily work at their callings, and be materially rewarded for it, and those who wanted little but the freedom to wander, or write poetry, could go to voluntary welfare societies set up by Capitalists who believed in Socialism, — in that society there will be no coercion. One Capitalist may be greedy, but another Capitalist may be a Socialist who thinks that  everyone is entitled to the basics of food (vegan of course), clothing, and shelter. The Socialist-believing Capitalist could donate, or set up himself,  a charity, and set the rules according to his Moral Views. Such a man might agree with Erich Fromm”s argument for Socialism, once made in an interview with Los Angeles television reporter Jerry Dunphy,: “You don’t expect your dog to work. But you feed him. I think a man should be treated as well as a dog.”

Such an argument carries much weight with Silverwolf. But it presupposes and forgets two facts: Firstly, while I may feel compassionate enough to give a meal to a hungry man, the next fellow on the block may not feel the same way, and I don’t have the right to impose my moral beliefs on my neighbor. As a Libertarian, I am only concerned with his actions; and that those actions do not constitute a violation of the Libertarian non-aggression axiom: No man or group of men may aggress against the Person or Property of another man. Such an aggression is regarded by the Libertarian as “invasion”, and it is. Such an invasion is a Crime against the Property Rights of that Man, and since we own our bodies, an attack on our persons is also technically a violation of Property Rights.

Secondly, the Socialist argument above flounders in the face of the fact that by confiscating, or voting to confiscate from my neighbor, money or “taxes” to fund my own personal Socialistic moral views, I am committing an act of Violence against my neighbor, which in itself, is a form of treating a Man like a dog, the very argument used above to justify Socialism.

So, what are we to do in the face of this inconsistency between Capitalism and Socialism?

To Silverwolf the answer lies in a radically free-Capitalist free-market society, where 95% of all people had voluntarily, through no coercion, found something they loved or liked to do, and so there would be a vast Middle Class. Some people, who for their own personal reasons, wanted to accumulate truly vast amounts of Capital and Wealth, could go ahead and do so, but most people would be satisfied with a type of upper class-Middle Class life, choosing leisure and amusement over passion-driven, fanatical accumulation. Emelda Marcoses could accumulate 700 pairs of shoes if they liked, but most sane people would settle for three to seven. More than that would become encumberences to all but the collector.

In this Free-Market  prosperous Free Society, with Thomas Jefferson’s Bill of Rights rigorously enforced, a certain percentage of people would be inclined to give to charity, which would, in turn, support those who were completely physically disabled, like someone in an iron lung, or those who wanted to live completely outwardly indolent lives, but focus all their energy on the Inner Life. These would be called Philosophers and Poets, but the Philosophers and Poets would know that if the people ever became hardened enough, they might stop giving to charity, and then the Philosophers and Poets would have to deal with a precarious situation.

All these arguments are pretty academic now that we live in a world where, given the capacities of our factories, everyone could easily be given a daily ration of grains and beans, a few Mao Suits to wear during the year, and a tent that could easily be Solar Heated. Mist collectors, as we recently saw reported, can now collect and condense enough water out of the air that people can survive on it in very dry climates or areas without a well. (Just the thing you need next time you break both your ankles hiking in Chemehuevi Valley, and your car battery goes dead when you try to start it.) With such condensers,  many desert areas could become livable again. Composting toilets, and the sanitary advantages of the vegan diet, or even charity built septic systems, could serve individuals or tribes when it came to the unthinkables of these few Philosophical Indigents and Poets. (But who would read them, or join in their philosophical explorations? The rest of Mankind would be busily working away at their Callings, havin’ a great ol’ time.) Some Philosophers and Poets would even be so brilliant and engrossing that their productions of Thought and Word would sell on the open- and Free-market, and they’d grow wealthy. Look at the Stones. Jagger is a Damn Good Poet.

But say we didn’t live in such a world. Say that five or ten men owned all the land in America, that they could charge a grand-a-night rent for every man, woman, and child, and since they owned all the agricultural land, they could charge a $100/lb for cornmeal and oats, those delicacies of a vegan society. Obviously people would starve to death, and there would soon be five or ten men left, and their families, and maybe some favored buddies and their concubines.

 Such circumstances of material inequality, Professor Rothbard maintained, only exist where the Crime of Land Theft has taken place in the past, as in Central and South America, and, on a local scale, in parts of the Old American West. In other words, such inequality indicates a massive violation of the Libertarian non-aggression principle, and would have to be rectified.

But in a truly Free-Market Jeffersonian Bill of Rights Society, with a vast Middle Class, no such draconian inequality would be possible. Monopolies and Trusts, though they may exist in certain markets and local economies, soon break down, as happened over and over again to the various “Trusts” in America, because of the phenomenon of the “Price Buster”, the guy in the Monopoly or Trust who starts giving secret kickbacks to favored customers in order to take advantage of the absurd price rise the Trust has created. This happened in Sugar, Kerosene, Train Freight Charges — every kind of Trust. They always went Bust. That is, until they learned to have Government help them restrict competition, from FCC licenses to Teaching Credentials to Barbers Licenses to the Screen Actors Guild, to that crucifier of Youths, the Minimum Wage Law.

So the arguments Socialists always pull out, about how a free-Market would lead back to the poverty of the 19th century and the robber barons, is absurd, and obviously a lie to justify their religion. The Industrial Revolution, as harsh and brutal as it was, had led by the 1920s to the possibility of a comfortable, Middle Class society, although still in the 1920s, 90% of Americans were poor farmers. But the momentum of prosperity was clearly there, and now in 2013 we have an absolutely incredible technological society, so complex that no individual can hope to understand it all, unlike the American Indian and the Kalahari Bushman who could completely understand their environment. They knew Everthing they needed to survive, and were Masters at it. We know nothing, except perhaps our little niche.

For example, in the future, modern  factories could easily manufacture super suits of clothes that were especially perfect for each of the four seasons. Each citizen could buy, or would be given by the Socialist charities, one or four of these suits, and that is all the clothing they would need. The suits would last a few years or decades. But the suits would probably be boring and functional, like Mao suits, as sterile and heartless as the modern bureaucratic services one sees in Great Britain, Australia, and America Northern. Only those who worked would have the capital to obtain their clothing on the free market, where they could satisfy their personal predelictions, like the late Brian Jones, or the connoisseurs of Saville Row.

One thing the anti-Capitalists don’t like to admit is that as people as a whole get wealthier, and the Middle Class grows, the number of goods and services that people want increases, providing more work or jobs, in increasingly more specialized areas, thus creating an even more prosperous society. There would be no end to this in a truly Free-Market society. In a poor society, a hungry arthritic pensioner is not going to hire someone to walk their beloved dog; in an upper-Middle Class society it is possible, and so someone who is unemployed but loves both to walk and to be with dogs, may and probably will be able to earn a wage. In a wealthy Rich society, you might even have those who specialized in walking certain breeds, or had a magical rapport with such breeds, and their wealthy arthritic owners might pay through the nose to hire such people to walk their dogs. Such walkers might become wealthy and noted celebrities, (and then there would be the profits from their book sales when they retire: “Vicious Great Danes I Have Known and Loved”).

But all this wealth, Freedom, and non-coercion is only possible if that Free Society has the Jeffersonian Bill of Rights, and it is here that we see in the Modern World the greatest threat to that great Capitalist Libertarian Society.

Sadly, very sadly for America, the fact that the two most powerful other monolithic Powers in the Modern World. who are completely anti-Libertarian in their attitudes and rule (Russia and the Old Soviet Republics, and Fascist China) and ruled by Paranoid, self-delusional Powermongers, are now in the process of being joined by the one place in the world where there still seemed to be some remaining spark of Libertarian creativity and Freedom left: The United States of America.

That was solely due to the Bill of Rights, and the fact that a large part of her economy was still in the hands of private Capitalists (the Small Businessman and the Investor). But these two Siamese twins, the Bill of Rights and Free-Market Capitalism, were dependent on one clear inalienable Right: the Right of Privacy.

It seems that when the Paranoia of Absolute Power strikes, it strikes first at this sacred, Natural Right, the Right of Privacy, the Right to be left alone if one is not violating the Libertarian Non-Aggression Axiom. This is what that beautiful thinker, Jefferson, as well as Madison and many of the others, could see so clearly, and what the modern politicians are trying to overthrow: that Beautiful Fourth Amendment.

They’ve succeeded in that overthrow of Privacy in the Totalitarian Societies, like Fascist China, and all the dozens of other unspeakable dictatorships that curse this globe, be it North Korea or Zimbabwe.

And they’ve succeeded in the castrated Socialist societies like Australia, where the Australian Board of Statistics can throw you in jail and fine you $170/day if you do not answer questions about your sex life, as we recently saw on a report. And England and the EU, where the individual is tracked and kept track of, from Birth to Death. Never his own Man, but always a cog in the Socialist Machine.

And now, thanks to the Paranoiac in the White House, and the Politicians of both Parties, this violation of the Right of Privacy is coming to America.

Sir Richard Evans, in his brilliant series of lectures on Victorian England, pointed out that it was entirely possible for a man to go through life in Victorian England without ever once having had contact or engagement with Government or the State.

Not so in Modern America, with her dog-sniffing random searches of law-abiding motorists, or Socialist Australia, or Fascist China.

When the Lords put the squeeze on King John, he was forced to cede to them with Magna Carta, and Libertarian Freedom had its first Outbreak.

But when we come to the psycopathic Criminals and Mass Murderers, Hitler and Stalin, we can see what those who achieve absolute power, by absolutely destroying Privacy, are capable of doing. And the more power they have, the more paranoid and bloodthirsty they become. It’s almost like a Law of Nature, a Law that Thomas Jefferson well understood. Go read defecting former-KGB agent Oleg Gordievsky’s great “KGB: the Inside Story”, and you will see what Absolute Power does to the men at the top, as we are now seeing in America, as it becomes more and more a bureaucratic police state, that can harass anyone who criticizes it.

The road from The Lords of England’s victory over King John with Magna Carta, to the Libertarian Jefferson’s victory over King George III with the Bill of Rights, was a long one.

The degeneration from Hitler and Stalin until today is a short one, made all the more sinister by the perversions of modern science and technology. And the Politicians are exploiting that technology to overthrow the Bill of Rights, a Bill that doesn’t talk of “balance” when it comes to Natural Rights, but “Inalienable Rights”, Rights that can never be taken away from any Human Being without violence being perpetrated.

Is Mankind to go forward into a bright upland of Prosperity, non-coercion, and Privacy, or is he to be the plaything of Socialists and Fascists like the head of Fascist China, or the sexually-prying questions of a perverted Hag like Australia’s PM, Julia Gillard?

Strangely enough, Silverwolf believes that Libertarian Man will eventually Prevail over the Fascism and Socialism of the modern Politicians at the top.

Hoooooooooooooooooooooooowwwwwwww! — Silverwolf

Libertarians: Capitalists or Free-Marketeers?

April 12, 2013

In re-reading Professor Murray Rothbard’s wonderful essay, “Capitalism vs. Statism”, we were reminded that “capitalism” is a term invented by Marx and used by the Marxists. In contrast to this is the idea of the “free-market”, which arises naturally whenever men are left to their own devices, as in a peasant or jungle society. It needs no central planning, as each man produces or does what he has in abundance or trades his unique skills for the products of other producers, without any coercion. Any contractual disputes between producers and consumers are brought before the wise elders of the community or tribe, and settled.

So, this distinction set us thinking about whether we should use the term “capitalist” at all, and choose rather to employ the term “free-marketeer” in its place. Is not using a term coined by Marxists to describe the free-market  playing into their hands?

Indeed, what image does the term “capitalist” conjure up in the mind? Does it not mean someone whose one drive is to acquire capital, or money? In other words, someone obsessed with money? In getting this term dispersed in wide-spread usage, the Marxists have achieved a popular view that capitalists are money-obsessed individuals.

Now, what does the term “free-marketeer” imply? Much more that someone who is money-obsessed. Firstly, it stresses that one wants freedom not only for oneself, but for the other party in the transaction. And also, one wants freedom for everybody else doing transactions, and making markets. Freedom for all! Not just for me. Secondly, it shifts the emphasis from the money-half of the transaction to the commodity-half of the transaction. In other words, the true free-marketeer is interested in the commodity he is either getting, or getting rid of in the market, much more than the money-half of the transaction. Certainly, the seller is very interested in taking receipt of the asking price in terms of cash, but that cash is almost always as a means to some commodity or service that the seller values. The wealthy seller may find it in the added security of having his cash balance just a little bit larger, and further away from bankruptcy; the hungry seller in the lentil sandwich he just bought with the proceeds of his last sale. But in both cases there is some value, be it the elimination of the physical discomfort of hunger or the psychological gratification of being slightly more financially secure, which makes it worthwhile for the seller or buyer to engage in his action.

This emphasis on the commodity and its implimentation by the new owner for some physical or psychological value is the real meaning of the “free-market”, not two parties to a transaction who are only interested in the capital-half of the transaction. Obviously, the buyer is far more interested in the thing or service he is receiving for his money rather than just his money, or he wouldn’t have spent it. Even when one is “forced” to sell or buy, it is always to achieve a desired physical or psychological need, be it bread or selling one thing to pay off the debt on another thing. So “free-market” implies not money, but action, i.e. the action to which the acquired commodity is put.

Now, it seems to us that Mr. Libertarian, Thomas Jefferson, saw this subtle distinction between physical property and the ends to which it is put. Jefferson, in our view, was a Renaissance Man; one of the greatest. In his life’s actions, one can see the intellect of the Renaissance Man constantly at work, whether he was approaching gardening and farming, the construction of Monticello so that the U.S. Mint could put it on the back of the nickel 180 years later, playing the violin, collecting and reading books, arguing for the Abolition of Capital Punishment in Virginia, or putting forth the most lucid case ever for the Natural Law philosophy of Libertarianism in his masterpieces, the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights.

In earlier documents the phrase “Man is endowed with certain inalienable Rights, amongst which are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness” had read “Life, Liberty, and Property”. But we believe Jefferson had the amazing insight to make the Libertarian leap from mere “property” to the much larger cause or aim to which it is put, that is “the pursuit of happiness”. This insight directly correlates to Ludwig von Mises subjective valuation principle which is one of the major breakthroughs in economics of the Austrian School — that the value of anything is its subjective value to the owner or purchaser, and that value can never be predicted. No wonder all the other schools of economics could never ever figure out how to measure the value of an object; it cannot be done except subjectively. It can only be measured it terms of its psychological gratification and value to the property owner.

Now, Professor Rothbard in his essay breaks Capitalism down into two breeds: “state Capitalism” and “free-market Capitalism”. State capitalism is what we have in America and the West: the government and associated industries looting wealth from individual Capitalists, a form of Mussolini’s Fascism. “Free-market Capitalism” would be — well, no one really knows exactly what it would be like since it has never really existed except in remote peasant and jungle communities that are probably unknown to modern history. Free-market Capitalism’s days as a world economic system are ahead of it, in the future, and not in the past which has never known it.

Whether we should use the rather longwinded terms “free-market Capitalism” and “free-market Capitalist” every time we want to refer to Capitalism or the Free-Market, or whether we should comply with the Marxists by using a term they coined which, as we have pointed out, has prejudicial connotations, or lastly whether we should always use the term “free-marketeer” instead  of “Capitalist”, is a hard decision which each Libertarian must make for himself. The subtle distinctions are probably beyond the comprehension (or interest) of most Socialists.

Hooooooooooooooooooooooooowwwwwwwwwwwwww! — Silverwolf

Euro-Socialism Unravels: The Cyprus Rip-Off

March 27, 2013

If you needed any additional proof that State Socialists are thieves, all you have to do is look to the example of Cyprus. The EU Commissioners, in their gall, have basically decreed that it is quite alright to rob outright “large depositors” of a huge percentage of their savings, although their earlier attempt to rob all depositors was so vociferously met by the Cypriot people that the Socialists had to back down. Then they “democratically” decided amongst themselves that they could pull the rip-off off if they only hit the “large depositors”, appealing to class hatreds which almost always work on Western Democratic electorates. Since they are only hitting the “rich”, those with just enough to buy a barely habitable home in Euroland, they knew that popular dissent would now not be harsh enough to be able to stop their pulling off the theft. And they have pulled it off.

As with most Socialist Bureaucrats, who have never worked in the real world where their income depended on themselves alone, or their business or employer’s business, but have had their Socialist wages paid out of the public coffers which are almost endless, they do not have any psychological conception of what their holy decisions have on those in the Free-Market economy, who have probably slaved for decades to build up their savings.

Socialist “solutions” always create additional problems which the Socialists never forsee because their thinking is mired in an economic ideology built on false and deeply immoral principles. Economic thinking needs to be based on sound principles, or it will always fail, and since Socialism is based on coercion, violence, the gun and the jail cell (try not paying your taxes and see what happens), it can never match the respect for Individual Rights, based on Natural Law, and non-aggression against Persons and Property, that Libertarianism champions.

What the EU Socialist Commissioners have done is to put every thinking Capitalist in the Western World on notice that if they live in a Socialist Economy (and who doesn’t now? Even Switzerland has vowed to inflate the CHF Franc if it gets too “strong”.), — if they live in such an economy, their savings in any bank are no longer safe, no matter what verbal “guarantees” the government officials gave the public yesterday. From Eastern Poland to Portland Oregon, all Capitalists in between now know that if their country’s banking system collapses, as all these Socialist banking systems eventually will, then their savings are subject to confiscation by the Communists, calling themselves “Social Technocrats” or EU Commissioners, or “The Democrats”.

In America, it is unfortunately comparatively common for a bank robber to be shot to death in the course of robbing a bank. But when the EU Commissioners rob thousands of people of billions of dollars of their savings, they can walk away scott free. Why aren’t they shot as bank robbers, or at least arrested, tried, and jailed for extremely long periods of time, as being a clear menace to Civil Society?

The EU Commissioners are nothing but a bunch of Socialist Looters engaged in full-scale cozenage, and the EU is nothing but a giant Socialist forced-labour, zwang-arbeit, camp, where any individual initiative and excellence is punished to curry to the self-indulgent masses and the government-allied corporations. How outrageous that vegetarians and vegans are forced to pay the medical bills for millions upon millions of meat-eating, booze-guzzling, tobacco-addicts. An outrage!

Let the Cyprus Crime be a warning to all Libertarian Free-Marketeers in the Western World: Either brake the Socialists at the polls by electing radically Free-Market Austrian-School-of-Economics Capitalist Libertarians, who will put the Individual above the State and the Corporations, or face further lifetimes of drudgery under the State Socialists in their alliance with the Corporations, not only for yourself, but also for your families and the generations to come.

So let Cyprus be a warning to all Free-Market Capitalists. And to all Socialists too, for you have forever destroyed the myth of a safe banking-system, under any Socialist Central Bank economy, like the EU, the USA, Canada and Australia.

Just try restoring “investor confidence” now by flapping your lips some more.

Hooooooooooooooooooooowwwwwwwwwwwwww! — Silverwolf

The Free Market vs. Fascist Frank of Fiji

April 14, 2009

Silverwolf can already taste in his wolfbuds the downfall of another Fascist, e’en one who has just wrested power a few hours ago.

Fascist Fiji, under its new dictator, “Commodore” Frank Bainimarama, is already implementing all the classical trappings of a coup of gangsters, as they try to take over the sovereignty of a whole nation. Gangsters are usually satisfied with single neighborhoods, or perhaps large chunks of metropolises if ambitious; they rarely try to take over an entire country.

But it has happened in Fascist Fiji. The Supreme Court invalidated the coup, the “Commodore” pledged to honor the ruling in the evening, and on the next morn, his subaltern in fact, if not in name, the senile “President” Iloilo, suspended the Constitution, sacked all the judges in the courts, from low to high, and appointed Fascist Frank as “interim PM”, with elections scheduled a mere 5 years into the future. Since then, the press has been muzzled, with police representatives present in every editorial room, making sure that not one word of criticism, and only “healthy” stories go out to the public. The Australian Broadcasting Corp.’s correspondent, was told to pack up and leave, unless he’d report in a likewise fashion, which he refused to do, and so was forcibly deported. The same for the Radio New Zealand reporter. And the three judges that made up the high court, comparable to the US Supreme Court for Fiji, hot-footed it out of the country, after being lightly detained. The head of the Law Society was also “called in to have coffee”, and then told he would have to be detained overnight, though there was no charge made against him. It’s clear that a bunch of amateur Mussolini’s have grabbed Fiji. But the signs look ominous for them.

The first cut is the deepest, and when it comes to Fascist regimes, the first cut comes from Capitalism. We should remember that in the mid-1930’s, Hitler’s greatest fear was that his persecution of the Jews would unleash a backlash boycott of Germany. He slowed down in his persecutions, at that time, at least long enough to gain himself the respectability of having a legitimate regime by hosting the 1936 Olympics, and having the Americans, as well as many other countries, participate. A similar legitimization of Communist China recently occurred with the Peking Olympics.

And so it is we hear that the National Bank of Fiji has imposed currency restrictions on its inhabitants, ostensibly because the country only has a couple of months of reserves left, and the inhabitants are buying too many outside goods, and need to have their spending curtailed (the normal activity of consumers in a free-market to seek to have their needs fulfilled). This wicked normalcy will now be overcome by government fiat. And these clowns really think people might now consider investing in Fiji, instead of now trying desperately to get every penny they can out of there?

Of course, when the national bank, and the country, run out of money, then who will pay the troops? And here we have the dilemma of all tinpot Fascists? How can they be sure of the people they are depending  on for their security? The reason the King used to sit in court, with everybody in front of him, and facing him, and bowing to him when they approached, was mainly to prevent anyone attacking the King when he was caught unawares. This way, he could see everybody, and they had to be prone, and obviously disarmed when they approached His Highness. But when the King ran out of money to pay the soldiers, the soldiers tended to get restless. And the King had heard the tales of other Monarchs who didn’t pay the Piper. They tended to have counter-coups staged against them.

And so, this first currency restriction, and the absurdly draconian measures which Fascist Frank and his supporters are imposing on Fiji, are merely a sign of the coming desperation.  If the country runs out of money, the soldiers won’t get paid; if the soldiers don’t get paid, the chances of a coup within the coup grow, day by day. And finally, a reforming military man, who may be a fan of Democracy, or even Jeffersonian-Libertarianism, will come to power, and return the country to a Constitution, and the Free-Market, or as much of one as can exist in a neighborhood featuring the  Marxie-twins of Aussie and Zealand.

Give it up, Fascist Frank, and return Fiji to Freedom and the Free-market, under the Constitution. If you don’t, then the Tao of Capitalism will do the job for you.

Hoooooooooooooooooooooooowwwwwwwwwwwwwww! — Silverwolf