Wednesday, May 28, 2014
Learning about liberty can be confusing, as many people who talk about it and describe it often use terms differently from what most people are used to. Therefore, I decided to create a glossary to assist students of liberty to navigate a new perspective on common terms. Any underlining indicates a defined term within the glossary. If you believe any important terms are missing, please let me know in the comments. Happy learning!
Aggression - The initiation of force or the threat of force. If one party commits aggression, it is implied that no other party used force or the threat of force before the aggression occurred. Aggression usually includes breaking the terms of a contract and fraud.
Wednesday, May 21, 2014
That’s the non-aggression principle and that’s really all that needs to be said. I believe it to be true, I believe that it is a universal principle, and when that principle is extended outwards and applied to every imaginable component of society, the only possible conclusion about the proper role of government that can be reached is that legitimate government is impossible.
Wednesday, May 14, 2014
I am optimistic about the future. I believe that more people will enjoy liberty in the future than ever before in the history of the world. It's easy to become pessimistic when you learn about the constant abuse of human freedom by governments around the world. I don't necessarily believe liberty is always increasing. There are certainly speed bumps along the way where things can get worse (sometimes much worse). But I will briefly focus on two reasons why I do not fear for the overall future of liberty.
Wednesday, May 7, 2014
Many people concerned with liberty often cite the concept of States' Rights. States' Rights essentially refers to the constitutional fact that all the powers of government that were not specifically delegated to the federal government, and that were not specifically prohibited by the Constitution, were reserved for the States, or the people, to exercise. This fact is embodied in the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution. A cursory glance at the current situation in the United States will reveal numerous violations of the Tenth Amendment. Anything that the federal government does that is not specifically outlined in the Constitution violates the letter and the spirit of the Constitution. It is not hard to find or think of specific examples so I will not do that here.
So does this mean that an individual state is allowed to pass oppressive laws, subject the people to violence, and take away their rights, simply because it is NOT the federal government? The answer is a resounding NO! The thought is not only anti-liberty, but also unconstitutional.