| ||||
| ||||
| Moderated by: Joe Kelley |
|
||||||||||||||
| No Debate | Rate Topic |
| Author | Post |
|---|
| Posted: Wed May 3rd, 2006 01:21 pm |
|
1st Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.lewrockwell.com/rockwell/block-hotseat.html Block persists not because he wants to beat anyone down, but because he is so sincere about finding truth and ferreting out error. If he is wrong about a point, he wants to know it. That's why his opponents always end up on the hot seat. First: The author of the piece above is: Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr. I have exchanged e-mail with that INDIVIDUAL. Having submitted my own piece for publication at his site (where so much valuable information can be found) our, Lew's and my own, lives connected. My piece was rejected. It wasn't good enough for publication. I may still have the entire correspondence saved somewhere. I responded with a request to debate the relative merits of my perspective to which the response was again negative. No debate and no hot seat whatsoever. At that time my perspective remains founded upon Equity and INDIVIDUAL SOVERIEGNTY as described by Josiah Warren in both of his works “Equitable Commerce” and “True Civilization” and seconded by Stephen Pearl Andrews in his work “The Science of Society, The True Constitution of Government, Cost the limit of Price.” Those works can be found here: http://tmh.floonet.net/pdf/jwarren.pdf http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/Anarchist_Archives/bright/warren/truecivtoc.html http://classicalliberalism.blogspot.com/2006/04/science-of-society-no_10.html In addition to those sources are additional sources that make up what amounts to my side of the so called Hot Seat: Mutual Banking by W.B. Greene: http://www.the-portal.org/mutual_banking.htm Trial by Jury by Lysander Spooner: http://lawcasella.com/spooner/TrialByJury.htm The Hot Seat that I bring to the table is founded upon the above sources mainly but not exclusively by any means. If a Debate were to actually occur, then, my contributions could be no more than direct quotes from those sources. In other words: those sources supply all the heat. I can simply transfer the heat. So…the heat was rejected completely by Lew, the author the piece linked at the beginning of this thread and the subject of this tread is Walter Block. Murray Rothbard, in his life, was known as Mr. Libertarian. We can make a solid case that the title now belongs to Walter Block, a student of Rothbard's whose own vita is as thick as a big-city phonebook, and as diverse as Wikipedia. Whether he is writing on economic theory, ethics, political secession, drugs, roads, education, monetary policy, social theory, unions, political language, or anything else, his prose burns with a passion for this single idea: if human problems are to be solved, the solution is to be found by permitting greater liberty. I met Walter Block. We exchanged words; sort of. Next time I'd like to bring a video camera. Before delving into the meat of our exchange from my perspective it may help to set the stage leading up to the meeting. I went here: http://www.mises.org/upcomingstory.aspx?control=73 Hear this: http://mises.org/multimedia/mp3/aefm/Paul.mp3 I may be the second 'anarchist' referred to in that speech (which is a very good speech well worth my cost of attending the conference). As far as I know: My presence at the conference was ignored completely. That is quite a mystery. I went there seeking answers to specific questions: Upon arrival I saw a basket on a table requesting questions from the audience to be submitted to the panel for discussion. I filled the basket up with questions like this: 1. Is the internet an example of a Free Market? 2. What is the effect of the internet on productivity? 3. Is falsehood a commodity? 4. How will China be affected by internet technology? I cannot attest to the accuracy of my memory concerning the questions I did write down, place in the basket, and record for all to see, hear, and consider reasonably, at liberty, and with all due respect toward the person asking the questions as requested by the organizers of the conference. In other words I honored the request by supplying the demand for questions. Note: Not one of my questions was tabled during the entire conference. I did however receive answers. Before the start of the conference I happened upon a person who I did not know then but do know now. His name is Walter Block. That is Mr. Libertarian’s successor to the throne i.e. Walter Block. I have no “title”. I am not a famous public speaker. I am somewhat like a bull in a china shop when it comes to speaking in public. When I ran for congress, however, my critics compared me to Thomas Paine. Perhaps due to my repetition of the word Liberty often and with as much sincerity and force of will I could muster. With cup of coffee in hand I met Walter Block. Had I recorded the events that transpired, had I invested in that effort, I would now be able to publish the verbal commerce verbatim. I did not so I cannot. What was on my mind was current individual transactions between citizens of the U.S. and citizens of China particularly concerning internet commerce. I said something about Sneakers "made in China". Walter Block looked down at my Sneakers and visibly sneered; or at least that was my perception. The conversation deteriorated. I cannot now confirm the reason for the lack of equity. It cost me too much, in my opinion, in the effort to discuss the vital topic concerning power between the U.S. and China. That event occurred in February 2005. It is now May 3, 2006 Relations between Chinese and U.S. citizens continue to be a vital means to a vital end i.e. Liberty and the internet continues to be a vital link. Relations between China and the U.S. may heat up soon if the U.S. nukes Iran. The HOT SEAT may become very, very HOT. Meanwhile; the professors continue to profess and the makers of sneakers continue to trade sneakers for dollars. That may change in a big way soon. It may be a good idea to look past the professors professions and think in terms of Equity in Commerce. Liberty is on that path. The internet destroys the borders hampering that endeavor in a big way. Anyone is invited to heat me up. Bring your best suit. I’ll wear my tee shirt.
|
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| Posted: Wed May 3rd, 2006 02:11 pm |
|
2nd Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.lewrockwell.com/margolis/margolis28.html Building and sustaining good relations with China is and will remain America’s most important foreign policy challenge for the next decade. The United States must devise ways of living with China’s economic competition, surging demand for resources, and inevitable growing geopolitical influence in Asia and the western Pacific while avoiding confrontation. Two highly nationalistic, muscular, and assertive great powers must somehow learn to co-exist. The visit was downgraded to an economy-class event known as an "official visit." This was a huge insult and major loss of face for President Hu and 1.2 billion Chinese. I was surprised that Hu did not cancel the visit. Am I the only one who can see the contradiction? What is needed, in my opinion, is the faintest measure of, even pretentious, empathy. Hu, an individual, may have chosen to avoid the pomp and preposterous notion eluding to any legitimizing focus of public and private attention upon an active mass murderer who, by the way, is contemplating the release of nuclear fallout - in the worst way possible i.e. covert, deceptive, criminally aggressive, and very likely to ensure mutual destruction of the entire human race forever. And this is not my personal 'sky is falling' "Conspiracy Theory", rather, the stated, path chosen by "The Decider" albeit not the intended reasons for the "First Strike". How can one tell when "The Decider" is lying? I think Hu can answer that question and I don't think I need an interpreter. Last edited on Wed May 3rd, 2006 07:51 pm by Joe Kelley |
|||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| Posted: Wed May 3rd, 2006 07:47 pm |
|
3rd Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig7/chesser2.htmlLet us make the effort to become wise. Read Aristotle, Pascal, Augustine, The Gospels, Proverbs, Adam Smith. Read those who have gone before us and become truly wise. Ponder what they have to say. Become wise yourself. In becoming wise you will not fall prey to the blandishments of those who falsely consider themselves wise. I'm the cut and plaster. Here is more: http://lawcasella.com/spooner/TrialByJury.htm#_Toc499747605 The authority of a Saxon monarch was not more considerable. The Saxons submitted not to the arbitrary rule of princes. They administered an oath to their sovereigns, which bound them to acknowledge the laws, and to defend the rights of the church and the people; and if they forgot this obligation, they forfeited their office. In both countries, a price was affixed on kings, a fine expiated their murder, as well as that of the meanest citizen; and the smallest violation of ancient usage, [*55] or the least step towards tyranny, was always dangerous, and often fatal to them.” --- Ditto, p. 139-40. The Saxons, who subdued Britain, as they enjoyed great liberty in their own country, obstinately retains that invaluable possession in their new settlement; and they imported into this island the same principles of independence, which they inherits from their ancestors. The chieftains, (for such they were, more than kings or princes,) who commanded them in those military expeditions, still possessed a very limited authority; and as the Saxons exterminated, rather than subdued the ancient inhabitants, they were, indeed, transplanted into a new territory, but preserved unaltered all their civil and military institutions. The language was pure Saxon; even the names of places, which often remain while the tongue entirely changes, were almost all affixed by the conquerors; the manners and customs were wholly German; and the same picture of a fierce and bold liberty, which is drawn by the masterly pen of Tacitus, will suit those founders of the English government. The king, so far from being invested with arbitrary power, was only considered as the first among the citizens; his authority depended more on his personal qualities than on his station; he was even so far on a level with the people, that a stated price was fixed for his head, and a legal fine was levied upon his murderer, which though proportionate to his station, and superior to that paid for the life of a subject, was a sensible mark of his subordination to the community.” --- 1 Hume, Appendix, 1. They were not allowed to impose taxes on the kingdom.” --- Ditto, P. 146. They declared war, it is said, and made peace. In both cases, however, they acted as the instruments of the state, and put in execution the resolutions which its councils had decreed. If, indeed, an enemy had invaded the Kingdom, and its glory and its safety were concerned, the great lords took the field at the call of their sovereign. But had a sovereign declared war against a neighboring state, without requiring their advice, or if he meant to revenge by arms an insult offered to him by a subject, a haughty and independent nobility refused their assistance. These they considered as the quarrels of the King, and not of the nation; and in all such emergencies he could only be assisted by his retainers and dependents.” --- Ditto, p. 147-8. Well...there is a lot to chew on above not the least of which is this: In both countries, a price was affixed on kings, a fine expiated their murder, as well as that of the meanest citizen; and the smallest violation of ancient usage, [*55] or the least step towards tyranny, was always dangerous, and often fatal to them.” Repeated here: The king, so far from being invested with arbitrary power, was only considered as the first among the citizens; his authority depended more on his personal qualities than on his station; he was even so far on a level with the people, that a stated price was fixed for his head, and a legal fine was levied upon his murderer, which though proportionate to his station, and superior to that paid for the life of a subject, was a sensible mark of his subordination to the community.” --- 1 Hume, Appendix, 1. A wise person would be cautioned enough in his or her individual judgment to inspect those practices, in history, with diligence. One might compare that 'price' to this: http://www.outpost-of-freedom.com/jimbellap.htm A few months ago, I had a truly and quite literally "revolutionary" idea, and I jokingly called it "Assassination Politics": I speculated on the question of whether an organization could be set up to legally announce that it would be awarding a cash prize to somebody who correctly "predicted" the death of one of a list of violators of rights, usually either government employees, officeholders, or appointees. It could ask for anonymous contributions from the public, and individuals would be able send those contributions using digital cash. One might want to add this too: http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=complete_911_timeline&startpos=900 There is a sharp increase in short selling of the stocks of American and United Airlines on the New York Stock Exchange prior to 9/11. A short sell is a bet that a particular stock will drop. The promise of misfortune can inspire action. http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=complete_911_timeline&startpos=900 There is a sharp increase in short selling of the stocks of American and United Airlines on the New York Stock Exchange prior to 9/11. A short sell is a bet that a particular stock will drop. The promise of fortune can inspire action. In ancient times the penalty for killing the King was a fine. The fine may have looked, to the King, like this:  Jim Bell, the guy who went to prison for tax evasion, supposedly, is the guy who spoke about a lottery whereby a bet was placed for - 'when the king would die', or something like that, and the winner would collect that "lottery" on that day. As to the short sell: Excuse me. This subject requires one more factor: Hume says: Note: "maintain sentiments of liberty, honor, equity, and valor" Note specifically: "equity" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equity Good luck with that one. Lawyers tend to make things complicated for a reason. I think the term is "job security". Something like this: Any intelligent fool can make things bigger, more complex, and more violent. It takes a touch of genius -- and a lot of courage -- to move in the opposite direction." From here: http://rescomp.stanford.edu/~cheshire/EinsteinQuotes.html Equity in layman’s terms: (without all the legal mumbo jumbo) http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=Equity
While I am at it: http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=Politic
True: 1. Truth or reality. Used with the. False:
Equity is just. Just as much true to me as it is true to you. Equity belongs with this: liberty, honor, equity, and valor An oath goes like this: You shall diligently inquire, and true presentment make, of all such articles, matters, and things, as shall given you in charge, and of all other matters and things as shall come to your knowledge touching this present service. The king’s council, your fellows, and your own, you shall keep secret. You shall present no person for hatred or malice; neither shall you leave any one unpresented for favor, or affection, for love or gain, or any hopes thereof; but in all things you shall present the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, to the best of your knowledge. So help you God.” Before getting back to 'selling short': Thou shall not swear falsely by the name of the LORD..." There is a history concerning falsehood. One more: Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance." Selling Short: Fundamentally speaking: An individual selling himself or herself short: A person must maintain the individual capacity to discriminate between what is true and what is false. Example: The individual is living in a time and place previous to the discovery of fire. It is cold outside. Lightening strikes and a fire starts. The individual sells himself short. No investment whatsoever. The individual cowers in the presence of fire. The fire burns out. Too bad. Two people are outside, some time later, and lightening strikes again. Another fire. This time one of the two sells herself long. She moves closer to the fire. The man follows. The woman stops short. The man touches the fire with predictable results; says the woman, later on, as she discusses the event with the other women - selling the men short. The women sell the men short. Meanwhile the men discuss the events. They prepare to elect a leader. They sell this leader long. Soon enough the group manages to wrestle from nature a new form of energy. Imagine that! Now; suppose the events didn't quite play out so smoothly. The men, perhaps, do manage to gain the capital called fire. Men, being as they are, decide to sell the women short. Fire, they declare to the women, is ours and not yours. In order to 'play with fire' an additional charge must be paid by women to men. No exceptions; ever. Not until women grow balls. Oh what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive! http://www.worldofquotes.com/author/Sir-Walter-Scott/1/index.html Back to 9/11 related short selling: After 9/11, both the SEC and the Secret Service announce probes into an unusually high volume trade of five-year US Treasury note purchases around this time. These transactions include a single $5 billion trade. The Wall Street Journal explains: “Five-year Treasury notes are among the best investments in the event of a world crisis, especially one that hits the US. The notes are prized for their safety and their backing by the US government, and usually rally when investors flee riskier investments, such as stocks.” The value of these notes has risen sharply since the events of September 11. The article also points out that with these notes, “tracks would be hard to spot.” I've been reading and adding. My calculations may appear to be absurd to those who have grown dependent upon authority and perhaps those who are infected with a serious case of falsehood i.e. a blind belief in authority. Jumping back in time to the discovery of fire and my example of short selling the calculation now arrives at two terms that should offer some insight. Credit Debt In simple terms: Credit: Selling long Debt: Selling short Had the men credited the women instead of selling them short, then, our world today would hardly be recognizable. Add up any possible profit that was realized in the endeavor to credit a little baby girl, any one of them, to be treated equitably, fairly, with no payment of debt associated with that little girls existence, other than a hope that she too would someday amount to something special and add another possible example, keep adding, add some more, multiply, accelerate, factor exponentially, and arrive at a world unrecognizable from that which exist today. How would one measure such a condition? No one can know. That didn't happen. Too bad. That is the past. Now is the present. Where do men now invest? Who is now credited? Will the human race learn to sell long? So...I am the fool. That is a given. What exactly measures my foolishness? 30 years for me, out in the world of misery, shoveling dirt, risking life and limb, and my society sends me a slip of paper titled: Your Social Security Statement. My credit went first to my wife. Sitting next to me is my son, who has also seen the wisdom of avoiding college investors that require him signing up for "SELECTIVE SERVIVCE", and on my left, on the couch, is a not so little girl who, by all measure, is the future of our world. I am a fool for sure, my prejudice is deep, and my falsehood is unrecognizable to me. However; I know enough to sell long. I know enough to credit sound investment. Investing in DOOM may be a sure bet, however, it can easily turn into a self-fulfilling prophecy. Last edited on Thu May 4th, 2006 06:52 am by Joe Kelley |
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| Posted: Fri May 5th, 2006 12:04 pm |
|
4th Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
Time to do some adding: http://austrianforum.com/index.php?showtopic=737&st=20 The self-proclaimed GreedyCapitalist hands down the verdict: I am closing this thread on account of it being absurd. One of my “absurd” questions: At what time does the ‘investments’ drive the outcome? The answer is simple: Always. And what, then, coincidentally is this: http://www.lewrockwell.com/engelhardt/engelhardt186.html Gee, you don't exactly have to be a genius to grasp this. You only have to take the odd glance at the oil-futures market – at present the hottest thing in town (other than oil company profits). Whack Iran and you probably get $120 a barrel oil or worse on the spot. In fact, just the threat may get you there. And that's before Iran lifts a finger. Regime change in Iran via the preponderance of American air power? It will surely be more like global turmoil – some version of Iraq writ painfully large (and if you think things are bad for Americans in Iraq now, just wait). I sent a challenge to Tom too. It doesn't, indeed, take a genius to grasp this: Oil futures are investments driving a specific outcome. GreedyCapitalists, self-proclaimed, or hiding behind a false label, do invest in driving specific outcomes. Like: Censorship It doesn't take a genius to figure that out too. But alas the goal in mind, the outcome driven to, is falsehood and it consumes the indivdual host. One dons the hats of the three monkeys. Eyes, ears, and mouth firmly shut. Meanwhile the investments continue to flow and drive the specific outcome. It is this: every individual will attempt to secure his own requirements as completely as possible to the exclusion of others.” Carl Menger (1840 -1921) Greed apology And this is the way it is done: Alexandr I. Solzhenitsyn The method by which that is undone is this: "Responsibility must be Individual, or there is no responsibility at all." Josiah Warren (1852) Because this is true: "Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance." However that does not address a chosen ignorance i.e. ignorance for the sake of ignorance - self imposed ignorance as an investment driving a specific outcome. Falsehood. The vicious cycle can be broken because this is true too: Public influence is the real government of the world." (Josiah Warren, 1841) No matter how much an individual falsehood pretends to ignore it; the Mob exists and from that soup will come steam, heat, energy, and power. Why not invest and drive that power constructively? Could it be because we are too busy screwing each other for the last piece of gold left or some other managed scarcity? I think, perhaps, the real answer lies in oil-futures. The lies lie in oil-futures and the lies lie in those individuals who invest and drive destructive power for the sake of destructive power. That is the answer to 'why not'? If the question tabled is "how to", then, the future will be investments in constructive power. And that is a very simple calculation but only to those who demand the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth; so help me God or so help me Truth. A chosen falsehood makes an otherwise reasonable person into a self-defeating living absurdity. One might exist like that in the short term. I'm having a hard time perceiving that to be living or securing ones own requirements completely as possible. It is the exclusion of others that would tend to ruin my conscience. 20 million of them or 60. Losing count is a dead give away, conscience is gone, and falsehood has accomplished the goal. No need for a jury. The peers have invested in the same future. Sleep well while the Mob remains confused and while the true Jury, with a conscience, is on vacation. But when the investments of falsehood comes due, then, conscience may demand more empathy. Maybe not Good luck!
|
|||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| Posted: Sat May 6th, 2006 02:35 pm |
|
5th Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.sobran.com/columns/index.shtml That link is on my things to check each day. For good reason.
|
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| Current time is 08:28 pm | |
| Power Independence > Fight Night > Debate > No Debate | Top |
