How To Fight Tyranny.

by **winsomecowboy** » Sun Jun 04, 2006 1:10 am

I often travel to third world countries and engage people there to make shoes for me. I must use an obscene amount of polluting jet fuel which will eventually harm more people than I'm helping and even while helping I'm paying substantially less for one off hand made shoes than I could otherwise never afford. I get to exploit someone but also have a relationship of sorts and end up wearing the product of that relationship. I have friends who produce clothing and it intrigues me to clothe myself in relationships I've made with real people rather than marketed brands. All very old world and indulgent I'll admit and I'm open to whatever blaze of withering criticism that may be kindled from this simple admission. We were talking about shoes? We were talking about Tyranny? We were talking about indignant intolerance of an honestly held viewpoint? Its hard to keep track but I believe that conversational tyranny (with a very small t ) is increasingly becoming the norm. It debilitates thoughtful, often needfully disiplined, discussion. Sophisticated aggression. Witty, snide, sarcastic attacks that celebrate the writer and are not so much a conversation or discussion but rather an opportunity to fan the tailfeathers of whichever linguistic peacock holds roost at any particular time. Imagine an extraordinarily large pride of Lions feeding on a herd of Elephants who had collectively died suddenly (possibly scared to death by a helicopter buzzing them playing recorded whales through speakers) As is typical, the biggest Lions make the most noise, grab the largest, most tender tit-bits and snarl menacingly at anything that threatens their status. I feel that way about RI. It has good content, it's Elephants are tasty, and some of those Lions are impressive, huge chunk chomping animals who can finish an animal off in short order, digest it, construct a simple home with it's ribs and use a tusk as an antenna to amplify messages from other dimensions before other lions have half finished. But it has a rough and tumble carnivorousness to it. And i find it counterproductive. (Who cares? Just me . I'm not deluded enough to think it matters enough to possibly threaten anyone.) My point is this patient folk. I think its so much easier to win than it is to be understood. I think that tyranny is one of the ultimate wins and that the ability to grasp the humanity present in opposing viewpoints is the ultimate defense. On edit: unless they're aliens Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=winsomecowboy@rigorousintuition>winsomecowboy</A> at: 6/3/06 11:17 pm

by **AnnaLivia** » Sun Jun 04, 2006 1:25 pm

It’s as simple as this (ho ho ho): roth’s economics, YES, WOOF WOOF WOOF and a VERY BAD DOG it is…has played us like a chew-toy. We bred this dog of half-blind economics, then we neglected it until it became the meanest of beasts. “have you glimpsed the REAL HUMAN AND PLANETARY CONSEQUENCES this economics IS providing by the second, binky?” witness ye 90% of world wealth in the paws of the top 1%? Grabbings going from earners to non-earners constantly, through legal means, and at an escalating pace, with no imposed limit…none of which is even DENIED by even the bona-fido economists? Topsoil gone in a hundred years? 50 million working poor continued to starve each year on behalf of the billionaires? 11 million preventable – as in, the ones we know how to prevent – deaths for children under 5 every year? NIKE COULD MAKE SHOES IN AMERICA AND WOULD, if it didn’t have us all convinced of the rightness and necessity of heaping phallic piles of profit into the personal treasure chests of those poor working slaves at the top. You, roth, are trying to justify (give it up…it’s unjustifiable!) the global race to the bottom of the wage scale that cost the main breadwinner of this family his job…and he wasn’t making shoes, btw. These are the tip of the iceberg of the human and planetary consequences of roth’s VERIFIABLY PROVEN FAILURE trickle-down economics. “er…um…hello? Can I please speak to your honestly-held viewpoint? Hello, honestly-held-viewpoint? Can you say ‘response-able’? You are entitled to your own opinion, but not to your own set of facts. Goodbye, honestly-held viewpoint, and good riddance.” Here is the nut of it: Roth’s well-studied economics conveniently ignores the part of the equation it chooses to…just like I said ‘mainstream’ economics does. Burn this complete equation into your brain, mr. humanitarian/classical liberal/economics studying roth: if the coin you gave the man…the works-as-hard-as-anybody-but-is-vastly-underpaid man… for his shoes…for his sacrifice-he makes-in-order-to-contribute-to-the-social-pool-of-wealth … ...if the coin you gave him was originally stolen from his pocket, you have given him nothing, and his labor has put shoes on your feet, tho he may have none. What a benign and charming system. I’m…what’s the word…CAPTIVATED. We all are. It’s called extreme inequity. It enables tyranny. All of history proves this. It’s the opposite of justice. The rich first world lends money to poor countries…and receives in return from these poor countries in interest payments (god I’ve lost the damn figure so this is guess only) -trillions every year over and above what was lent. Which way is the wealth going, roth, which way is the wealth going? Golly, this seems like a good place to put these latest quotes coming from tom feeley at InformationClearinghouse! "When you see that trading is done, not by consent, but by compulsion - when you see that in order to produce, you need to obtain permission from men who produce nothing - when you see that money is flowing to those who deal, not in goods, but in favors - when you see that men get richer by graft and by pull than by work, and your laws don't protect you against them, but protect them against you - when you see corruption being rewarded and honesty becoming a self-sacrifice - you may know that your society is doomed: Ayn Rand - (1905-1982) Author - Source: Atlas Shrugged, Francisco's "Money Speech" "Were the talents and virtues which heaven has bestowed on men given merely to make them more obedient drudges, to be sacrificed to the follies and ambition of a few? Or, were not the noble gifts so equally dispensed with a divine purpose and law, that they should as nearly as possible be equally exerted, and the blessings of Providence be equally enjoyed by all? -- Samuel Adams - (1722-1803), was known as the "Father of the American Revolution." And a couple from Black Commentator: “Economic justice is a part of freedom. We must fight for a people’s economy.” – Dr. Julianne Malveaux “By necessity, Black labor finds itself unable to save African Americans unless it strives to rescue the nation and humanity at-large from the depredations of hyper-capital.” “Many of our fellow Americans – including members of the House of Labor – view the rich perpetrators of world disorder as mistaken human beings who can be convinced to act more responsibly. History has taught Black people a different lesson: a man whose actions consistently result in killing you, intends to kill you.” “We need liberation-oriented economics to pull all this together… We need a science of how to win under capitalism.” (gee...i wonder if anyone has ever noticed that I offer a plan to win under capitalism...oh, just…every once in a while around here?) “People with good jobs and benefits are an endangered species.” (that’s true, roth, because job scarcity is manufactured…and not by poor Mexicans, either) “Only people power beats money power. As Bill Lucy explained to the Orlando convention, we are rapidly running out of everything but ourselves.” “Kenny Diggs and Petie Tally, young union activists, handled the nitty-gritty “All Politics is Local” workshop. The question before the room was simple: “What actions can we take to create change?” <a href="http://www.blackcommentator.com/186/186_cover_black_labor.html">www.blackcommentator.com/...labor.html</a> and this last quote for good measure: “don’t believe everything you think” Look, understanding economics (just more of my wild opinions here) takes a little reading, studying, thinking, and thinking again. Guess what. It’s been done before me. And it’s been written out far better than I can do it. So, for two reasons…to preserve my time and to best-inform him… rather than give roth my lesser-helpful personal version, I linked him to some of the best material I could think of to start on…those essays I posted. I said we’d go from there if he’d read them. Did he? I don’t know, because he hasn’t provided any evaluation of their accuracy or their anything. And, please. Nike investigates Nike and discovers Nike is wonderful for the globe? How is it you even CONSIDERED presenting this as an argument…especially in a place like THIS? Do I smell smoke? Roth, thanks for deigning to give me your permission to feel free to comment on your ideas…right before you then hilariously objected to my having done just that. I feel so…so…so… liberated from tyranny by you. Roth is PLAINLY making things up and sticking them in other’s people’s mouths. Is this not true just because I refuse to let the use of my valuable time be dictated to me by roth? Am I obligated to take everyone by the hand and rub their noses in his own statements? Are we all reading the same words on these pages, or WHAT? People here SAW me “give money to people in poor third world countries” last Christmas…in their names!! Roth is making it up as he goes along, obviously. Right. My whole goal in LIFE is to prevent roth from having the freedom to buy whatever pair of sneakers he next craves. I have been working on this cunning plan all my life. I have clearly plastered this board with those intentions. Sweet sufferin’ succotash. If you want to cry and throw your crayons across floor, roth, go ahead. I wonder if you’ve ever heard of ‘the first rule of holes’. And as for running for the hills; if you hear silence from me after this, take it as a sure sign that it means I have concluded it’s a complete waste of time to speak further to you about economics. If I ain’t speakin’ the goddam inescapable truth here, may I be struck by lightning… while dogs howl at the moon. AnnaLivia

by **Dreams End** » Sun Jun 04, 2006 1:29 pm

ALP is back in all her glory. Nice post. <blockquote>Quote:<hr>...if the coin you gave him was originally stolen from his pocket, you have given him nothing, and his labor has put shoes on your feet, tho he may have none.<hr></blockquote>

by **friend catcher** » Sun Jun 04, 2006 1:53 pm

Factory owners in Bangladesh once faced international sanctions unless they stopped using child labor. Oxfam, the British charity, reported that the factory laid off 30,000 child workers. The children then took more dangerous jobs, with thousands becoming prostitutes or starving. We had the same problem here in Victorian times when they banned very young children from being chimney sweeps and working in factories. The little scamps were perfectly formed for crawling up chimneys and diving in and out of fast moving looms etc but the do gooders interfered and made things half civilized. It was quite traumatic for the factory owners and their profits almost suffered.Charles Dickens used to write maudlin' tales about that sort of thing. After that there was no stopping the do gooders with their clean air legislation and social security etc etc.

by **snowlion2** » Sun Jun 04, 2006 1:56 pm

While everyone takes a smoke/beer/potty break, can I just say...and I say it not without some small amount of accreditation...the quality of writing around this joint amazes me almost daily, and the talent pool appears to be happily growing. Winsomecowboy...your 18th post was a dandy, and that's from someone who treats metaphor as a singular art form. And AnnaLivia, good to see you again...you can turn a phrase like few others. Even when I mightily disagree with you and other posters of like articulation, I'm never short of admiration of your erudition and ability to communicate same. Hard to be angry for long with someone whose abilities are so conspicuous. Ok...back to it everyone.

by **rothbardian** » Sun Jun 04, 2006 8:55 pm

AnnaLivia-- I'm always fascinated in the way libs demure when it comes time to face the implications of their own views. You obviously want to see my shoe purchase outlawed. But when I simply restate your own views back to you...you are EXTREMELY unhappy about that. I reasonably assume from your comments (notwithstanding some stories about 'Christmas giving'?) that you do not believe in fighting the economic injustices of the PTB against Third World countries...by giving these poor people our business. There are great numbers of people in our part of the world who don't have a whole lot of 'coin' to spare for charitable donations but can nevertheless help these Third World folk by, again...giving them our business. You make the statement-- "...if the coin you gave him was originally stolen from his pocket, you have given him nothing, and his labor has put shoes on your feet, tho he may have none." That statement is utterly false. When I gave the shoemaker my money, I did indeed gave him something-- I gave him my money. Hello? Furthermore, it was his labor AND my payment for his labor that gave me the shoes (contrary to your misleading description). Whether he lives in a part of the world where the economies have been raped and pillaged by PTB robber barons...it doesn't negate my efforts to aid in his plight by doing my feeble part in giving him my business. Meanwhile, these PTB robber barons which parasitically attach themselves to corrupt centralized governments and depend upon these governments for their very existence (Halliburton comes to mind) go about their raping and pillaging. I would argue that as soon as you RI libs get back to your classical roots, you could start helping me to pull the plug on their ONLY source of illicit power...centralized government. There is a huge moral difference between a guy who simply goes to Hong Kong to buy wristwatches wholesale and takes them back to the US for retail sales (regardless of whether he is representing himself OR Walmart)... ...and businessmen who collude with government authorities to cook up a fake war so that they can have some juicy infrastructure repair contracts in the aftermath AND gain illicit control of that nation's oil wealth. Also...I don't know how you folks miss the evidence that contradicts the bulk of the 'horror stories' being concocted by leftwing propaganda about manufacturing in Third World countries-- If there were better jobs elsewhere in their region, and with better pay and better conditions....these employees would leave. As I said before, the PC police have stepped in and caused the layoffs of great numbers of young people, thus forcing them into absolute poverty and starvation, or into much more dangerous jobs (prostitution). Libs are perpetrating great tragedy in this manner. Such was the famous case of the 'Kathie Lee Gifford' fiasco involving the Honduras where thousands of jobs were lost. Manufacturing plants were shut down. So...firstly, the PTB perpetrate tragedy and injustice with their IMF loansharking scams which have driven all these countries into deep poverty. THEN secondly, the libs come up behind them for the final blow, in driving thousands out into the streets in the name of political correctness. Quote: [Twenty] years ago, Honduras had virtually no assembly plants. But with a booming international market for clothing, factories have sprung up all over the country to offer a way out of poverty and disease. Today, the country has 160 assembly plants that employ some 75,000 people. Those lucky enough to work in them are doing well in a country where per capita income is $600 a year and unemployment is 40 percent. Plants routinely subsidize lunch, offer free medical care to employees, and are air conditioned--benefits unheard of in other lines of employment. As one worker told the New York Times, "This has been an enormous advance for me, and I give thanks to the maquila [factory] for it. My monthly income is seven times what I made in the countryside, and I've gained 30 pounds since I started working here." <a href="http://www.mises.org/freemarket_detail.asp?control=45">www.mises.org/freemarket_...control=45</a> By the way, Anna-- I have looked over your essays but they all revolve around a conservative/liberal debate. I have virtually nothing in common with either of the two opposing views described there. All due respect (as if i'm getting any civility in return here) it's a case of 'the blind debating the blind' for me.

by **dugoboy** » Sun Jun 04, 2006 9:10 pm

i think i have one question that will clear the squabble up. rothbardian, do you believe the intermingling of national economies into an ever more integrated international economic world is just in its beginning stages and is in a period of transition? meaning that the bad things that anna talks about are only temporary. do you believe this? i ask this with no value judgement in favor to either view of the argument. ___________________________________________ "BUSHCO aren't incompetent...they are COMPLICIT."

by **rothbardian** » Mon Jun 05, 2006 1:15 am

dugoboy-- I would say there is no great hope for dramatic improvement in the world economy as long as the mechanisms of centralized control exist. The PTB are able to parasitically attach themselves to the IMF (which is virtually their creation) and run all these Third World countries into the ground. Virtually the sole source of economic injustice against Third World countries has been perpetrated by this PTB/IMF (International Monetary Fund) scam-- The IMF has gone around the world shoving bogus loans down the throats of various countries, either by going into corrupt cahoots with the central authorities of the various governments...or by strong-arming the government authorities. These various countries then proceed to drown in the interest payments that come due. The only way to stop that is to pull the plug on the PTB's power source...centralized control mechanisms. You can start down that road by, at the very least, advocating such. The other thing I can do as a consumer is...empower the poor people laboring in these contexts. In China, thanks to me buying many of their household products (for example), and thanks to others like me...we have so empowered the entrepreneurs over there that they have greatly (but not fully) diminished the standing of a totalitarian regime. I believe that "intermingling" as you say (or globalization) is good for everybody. It has given greatly increased prosperity to the Chinese people, as an example --even though, because of 'centralized government' issues, some of the prosperity is disproportionately distributed. And they, in turn, have benefited USA (and other) consumers by providing a wide array of important goods at tremendous savings. I say again-- If everyone in the world were allowed to bid anything in the world down to the lowest price...the cost of living would drop down to rock bottom, and thus it would require dramatically less income to live. It would also bring the entire array of goods and services...to the entire array on humanity.

by **isachar** » Wed Jun 07, 2006 11:44 am

centralized control? Are those participating in this discussion aware that the one industry sector that among those that are highly centralized/controlled is international the shoe/clothing industry? This industry is guided - indeed controlled - by trade allotments awarded by the U.S. government (Dept of Commerce I believe) for specific countries. The location of these operations is almost exclusively a function of the U.S. goverments award of these trade allotments. And, they change based on the most whimsical of principals (politics). I am amazed that anyone would argue that the international clothing/sneaker/stitching industryrepresents some type of Libertarian economics ideal when it is nothing of the sort. Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=isachar>isachar</A> at: 6/7/06 9:46 am

by **rothbardian** » Wed Jun 07, 2006 5:18 pm

Isachar-- I am sure what you are saying is true in most cases. I personally am only advocating that the little good I can do for these poor people in other countries is to give them my business as their customer. Meanwhile I'd love to see the bullying/obstructing U.S. government removed from the marketplace. I totally agree that many businesses rely on government favors/protection/control to conduct their affairs. Sometimes the government's horning in, isn't welcomed. For example, Sherman Skolnick (a dirty word around here?) has reported that the government has bullied it's way into Walmart store operations for the purpose of gathering intelligence on U.S. consumers. Related link: <a href="http://www.joplinglobe.com/local/local_story_148015054">www.joplinglobe.com/local..._148015054</a>

by **yathrib** » Wed Jun 07, 2006 5:28 pm

I was going to leave this alone, but I just can't take your faux naive, nursery school version of predatory capitalism anymore, Rothbardian. How do these third world people benefit from their exploitation? They get to stay alive. Sort of. Maybe. Meanwhile tyrannical governments like China get money and support for their various "projects." Oh goody! You're such a philanthropist! This pretty much reaffirms what I already knew about "libertarianism." Hey,I think I hear Michael W. Smith in the woods sacrificing a pigeon to Satan. If you hurry, you can still catch him!

by **isachar** » Wed Jun 07, 2006 7:45 pm

Roth says: "...the little good I can do for these poor people in other countries is to give them my business as their customer." Might I suggest something that is far more effective as measured on an individual, person to person and humanitarian basis: <a href="http://www.heifer.org/">www.heifer.org/</a> So much better on so many levels.

by **rothbardian** » Thu Jun 08, 2006 5:43 am

I would have to disagree with you on this one (I guess that's what discussion boards are for). I certainly am heartened by charity efforts. But subsistence charity can only be extended to a teensy tiny fraction of the impoverished of this world whereas... ...subsistence level income (or better) can be offered by the hundreds of millions of people who can at least offer to patronize the businesses in these Third World countries. There is a much smaller percentage of people who can afford to sustain continual charity donations.

by **Gouda** » Thu Jun 08, 2006 6:22 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>...patronize the businesses in these Third World countries.<hr></blockquote> And these Corps do appreciate your charity, Roth. Meanwhile, worldwide impoverishment worsens - that's a fact - despite NGO charity (another debatable topic) and because of Corporate Charity. Your "smaller percentage of people who can afford to sustain continual charity donations" are more or less those privilaged beneficiaries of corporate charity, administered by a corporate-controlled system and legitimized by an ignorant citizenry. Ironic, eh? Not so much.

by **rothbardian** » Fri Jun 09, 2006 2:44 pm

Gouda-- Well, I guess this thread is going round in circles a little bit. That's OK. Not everybody is able to read every post. So I will reiterate...or better yet, I would pose a question: What then would you propose to do with all these people who voluntarily take these jobs? As I said before, if there were better jobs elsewhere in their region, and with better pay and better conditions....these employees would leave. So for me, it is more than a little 'pollyannish' not to see through some (but admittedly not all) of the 'horror stories' and propaganda here in the West...as being cynically contrived 'alarmist' baloney from the unions who don't like the competition. You seem to be proposing that we step in front of these people and take what pathetic little employment they have, away from them by force. That has already been done and is currently ongoing, and every time this 'tragedy-by-liberalism' is perpetrated, it pushes these people deeper into poverty, it pushes them into the streets and into more dangerous jobs (prostitution, drugs etc.). These people are caught in the middle between..businesses who simply want to do honest business...and businesses that want to engage in illicit collusion with central authorities...and liberals (and neocons also) who don't know the difference between the two. I think it's unfortunate that this even has to be said but...there is nothing evil or immoral about a businessman who takes his wares to market. Hello? Astoundingly, there is no shortage of people who will mindlessly broadbrush ALL corporations (businesses) as evil. As I said before, numerous times the PC police have stepped in and managed to cause the layoffs of great numbers of young people (for example), thus forcing them into absolute poverty and starvation, or into much more dangerous jobs (prostitution). PC Libs are perpetrating immense tragedy in this manner. Such was the case of the 'Kathie Lee Gifford' situation in the Honduras. Thousands of jobs were lost. Many manufacturing plants were shut down. Whether there are, as you say, corporations which are being enriched ..it doesn't negate my efforts to aid in the plight of these poor people by doing my feeble part in giving them my business. Get rid of (or at least begin to advocate such)...centralized governmental authority and you will remove the ability for certain businesses/corporations to gain unfair advantage over their employees and customers. Without the coercion of immoral government authorities...any business is strictly at the mercy of voluntary customers (and voluntary employees).

How To Fight Tyranny.

Re: bs

Oh, no – not another learning experience!

Re: Oh, no – not another learning experience!

Re: Oh, no – not another learning experience!

Re: Oh, no – not another learning experience!

So you wouldn't make my shoe purchase illegal?

Re: So you wouldn't make my shoe purchase illegal?

Re: So you wouldn't make my shoe purchase illegal?

Re: So you wouldn't make my shoe purchase illegal?

Re: So you wouldn't make my shoe purchase illegal?

Aaaaarrrgggghhh!

Re: So you wouldn't make my shoe purchase illegal?

Isn't the fishing pole better than the fish?

Re: Isn't the fishing pole better than the fish?

Re: Isn't the fishing pole better than the fish?

Who is online