Re: RE: Re: Mises University

["Jeffrey L. Beatty" <Beatty.4@xxxxxxx>]

At 01:27 PM 2/22/01 -0600, Mathew Forstater wrote:

>reminds me that one of the controversies between the GMers and the Auburners was
>that the latter received donations from certain political groups that were
>against (certain kinds of) immigration and then suddenly Auburn was arguing
>against (certain kinds of) immigration. The GMers take their Austrianism pretty
>seriously and have a hard time with restrictions on the 'free mobility' of
>labor. inneresting
>
>
>



Mat's comment is consistent with what I know of Llewellyn Rockwell, whose libertarianism and Austrian economic perspective seem to be a smokescreen for an attempt to resuscitate John C. Calhoun as well as the rest of the "Lost Cause" of the old Confederate states.  A couple of years ago, someone posted a speech by Rockwell to CSF's International Political Economy list.  Here are some particularly provocative excerpts.


>>>>
> [In a "daydream" he has every four years, he imagines a president who] is elected indirectly, with the electors chosen as the
> states direct, with only one proviso: no elector may be a federal
> official. In the states that choose their electors by majority vote,
> not every citizen or resident can participate. The people who do
> vote, a small percentage of the population, are those who have
> the best interests of society at heart. They are those who own
> property, who head households, and have been educated.
> These voters choose a man whose job it is to think only of the
> security, stability, and liberty of his country.
<<<<
>>>>
> For those who do not vote and do not care about politics, their
> liberty is secure. They have no access to special rights [Note:  on the religious rights, "special rights" is sometimes used as a code word for gay rights], yet their rights to person, property, and self government are never in doubt. For that reason and for all practical purposes, they can
> forget about the president and, for that matter, the rest of the
> federal government. It might as well not exist. People do not pay
> direct taxes to it. It doesn't tell them how to conduct their lives. It
> doesn't send them to foreign wars, regulate their schools, pay
> for their retirement, much less employ them to spy on their fellow
> citizens. The government is almost invisible.
<<<<

[snip]

>>>>
> If by chance this system of liberty begins to break down, my own
> political community--the state in which I live--has an option: to
> separate from the federal government, form a new government,
> and join other states in this effort. The law of the land is widely
> understood as allowing secession. That was part of the
> guarantee required to make the federation possible to begin
> with. And from time to time, states threaten to secede, just as a
> way of showing the federal government who's boss.
<<<<

[snip]

>>>>
> That America would never have tolerated such an atrocity as
> the Americans With Disabilities Act. Here is a law that governs
> the way every local public building in America must be
> structured. It holds a veto power over every employment
> decision in the country. It mandates that people take no account
> of other people's abilities in daily economic affairs. All of this is
> arbitrarily enforced by an army of permanent bureaucrats
> working with lawyers who get rich quick if they know how to
> manipulate the system.
<<<<

[snip]

>>>>
> Combining liberty and property, people are able to exercise the
> all-important right of exclusion. I can keep you off my property.
> You can keep me off yours. You do not have to trade with me. I
> do not have to trade with you. This right of exclusion, along with
> the right to trade generally, is a key to social peace. If we cannot
> choose the form and manner of our associations, we are not
> free in any authentic sense.
>
>
> The breakdown of the freedom of association, especially in the
> form of anti-discrimination law, is a main reason why social
> acrimony has so increased in our time. Although hardly ever
> questioned, anti-discrimination law cannot be reconciled with
> the classical liberal view of society. No association that is forced
> can ever be good for the parties involved or society at large.
<<<<


The speech itself was at the 1996 summer seminar on classical liberalism held by the Scott L.Probasco Chair of Free Enterprise at the University of
Tennessee at Chattanooga.  You can read the rest of it at http://csf.colorado.edu/mail/ipe/jan99/0172.html

Anybody still wonder why I consider the Austrians _really_ scary people?

Of course, I should mention that I have known Austrians themselves to act embarrassed about Llewellyn Rockwell--but maybe that's just because he's all too clear about what his agenda is.





--
Jeffrey L. Beatty
Doctoral Student
Department of Political Science
The Ohio State University
2140 Derby Hall
154 North Oval Mall
Columbus, Ohio 43210

(o) 614/292-2880
(h) 614/688-0567

Email:  Beatty.4@xxxxxxx
______________________________________________________
If you fear making anyone mad, then you ultimately probe for the lowest common denominator of human achievement-- President Jimmy Carter