Keep the Borders Open (February 2002)

This is no doubt in my mind that closing borders to innocent human beings is one of the greatest evils of our time. Closed borders lead to people justifying cruelty to other humans whose only crime is that they seek to better themselves without harming others. People rhetorically say that they are illegal to justify their inhumanity. But if the government were to pass a law that all blonde people had to move to a desert camp, would one be justified in one's arrogant cruelty to those blondes who who ignored the ruling by saying that they were illegals. These illegals have not certainly not broken any libertarian law, but those who harass them are breaking the libertarian rule that one cannot infringe on the rights of others who do not violate your property rights.

The ridiculous argument that some pseudo-libertarians make, that crossing a border violates someone's property rights, ignores the reality that in any workable society there must be access routes from any available private property. This can either be an easement or a public route. Lack of access to one's property would be a gross violation of individual who wished to use that property. Of course, such public access routes exist at all of the borders, they are called highways. The border patrol's ridiculous assignment is to filter out individuals depending on nothing more than where they were born or to whom they were married.

Furthermore, it is silly to oppose a totalitarian state while being a proponent of totalitarian borders. If a nation becomes oppressive, should the citizens of that nation be condemned to die? How will the lies of the state be refuted if citizens are not free to travel and see the truth? How will one know who is a foreigner, if all citizens and legal residents are not required to carry identification? How will one have a limited state without the massive state apparatus necessary to block the traffic in individuals? How can citizens who misplace their papers avoid be deported by the state?

Proponents of closed borders have always wanted to oppress those who were less fortunate than themselves. They want an un-level playing field, a territorial monopoly, which is enforced by the government and they want you to pay for it twice: In higher prices because of the higher cost of their labor versus immigrant labor and because of the cost of enforcement, which is paid for by your tax dollars.

Who Killed Hariri?

Here are some theories as to who killed Hariri:

1. Islamist extremists who have not forgiven Syria its repression of the Muslim Brotherhood in the 80s;
2. Far-right Christians, anxious to rouse opinion against Syria and expel it from Lebanon and funded by the CIA, seeking to install an airbase;
3. Israel, whose ambition has long been to weaken Syria, sever its strategic alliance with Iran and destroy Hizbullah;
4. Syria as a severe miscalculation (This is the most ludicrous theory, espoused by neocons for self-serving empire building!).
   

Of these theories, the evidence seems to point to the first one:

1. A security camera shows a car bomb with round 660 to 770 pounds of explosives detonated as Hariri's entourage passed.
2. Ahmed Tayseer Abu Adas released a video claiming responsibility.
3. Lebanese authorities did DNA tests on the remains of a body found at the scene to establish they did indeed belonged to Abu Adas.

Further investigations will almost certainly confirm the killer, but do not expect the neocon adminstration to apologize to Syria or even recant their silly theory.

The Global US Empire

Approximately 350,000 U.S. troops (0.12% of the US Population) were stationed around the world in Feb, 2005. About 250,000 were deployed in combat, peacekeeping and counterterrorism operations, and an additional 100,000 in Germany, Japan, Italy and England were serving routine tours of duty. GlobalSecurity calculates that if civilians and dependents are added in, the number is 531,000 (0.18% of the US population and ~ 0.5% of US Population under 10-40 years old). Below is the number of troops stationed abroad by region:

• Iraq: 153,000
  
• Germany: 75,000
• Japan: 47,000
• South Korea: 37,000
• Italy: 13,000
• England: 12,000
• Afghanistan: 11,000
  
• Bosnia and Kosovo: 8,000 (Part of NATO's peacekeeping forces in Bosnia and Kosovo.)
• Qatar: 1,600
  
• Djibouti: 1,600 (Support for counterterrorism activities in the Horn of Africa region and monitors the southern entry to the Red Sea.)
• Haiti: 1,600 U.S. Marines as part of a multinational peacekeeping force.
• Philippines: 1,000 (Working with the Philippine military to combat terrorism.)
• Georgia: 75 (Marines training four Georgian battalions in counterterrorism.)
• Yemen: U.S. special operations forces trained 200 Yemeni soldiers in counterterrorism tactics last year.
• Colombia: Clusters of special forces soldiers train Colombian troops to fight leftist guerrillas and police narcotics trafficking.

True Libertarians

As more individuals become disaffected from the major political parties, many have assumed the name libertarian without knowing what it means. Here is a minimum necessary to be considered a libertarian in my mind:

1. You oppose all forced service (slavery), including the draft. Forced service violates one's ownership of one's labor.
   
2. You oppose any regulations on how private-property, including flags, should be displayed or treated, except to limit the effects on other's property. This is a violation of free expression.
3. You oppose all wars that were engaged or initiated for any reason other than for self defense and to satisfy lawful defensive treaties, such as The War to Install a Puppet Regime in Iraq and Make It Friendly to Corporate Donors.
4. You oppose all restrictions on access to pharmaceuticals (drugs), as this never directly affects other individuals.
5. You realize that war is the health of the state and oppose all undeclared wars (police actions): Viet Nam, Cambodia, Korea, Panama, ...
6. You oppose any compromise of civil liberties, such as the Patriot Act.
   
7. As required for honoring our treaties, United Nations approval is a necessary condition for declaring war. The Iraq War II was not honorable because it violated UN resolutions that it claimed to be upholding.
8. You oppose restrictions of trade (unless it is proven that a particular country is employing slave labor).
9. You oppose restrictions on free entry and exit, without probable cause of criminal intent.
10. You oppose militarily-imposed puppet democracy building and allow national self determination.
11. You oppose forcibly disarming other free nations.
12. You support only proportionate retaliatory military responses, or de-escalations, not overwhelming punitive responses.
    
13. You oppose the centralization of the control of lethal force. There should exist a balance of power between competing authorities (branches of the military, coalitions of states, counties, etc) .
    
14. You oppose government sanctioned monopolies, such as:
    currency production
    banking
    medicare/medicaid
    social security
    unemployment insurance
    schooling
    airport security
    airline traffic control
    mail transportation
    sports stadiums
    airport construction
    
15. You oppose government regulation of the free market sector, except as to ensure that the rights of others are not violated.
    
16. You oppose both high government taxation and spending. (GW lowered taxes, but increased spending.)
17. You oppose government deficit spending, because it usurps congressional authority.
    
18. You oppose all government licensing. All licensing should be by private certification boards.
    
19. You oppose forcing individuals to make any statements, including the pledge of allegiance.
20. You oppose regulations on the use of private property.
21. You oppose centralized government licensing.
    
22. You oppose any restrictions on immigration that would not apply to citizens.
    
23. You support the equal right of individuals (not convicted of a felony) to acquire (limited) lethal force without licensing.
    

Competing Power Centers

Political power is wielded either by direct or indirect psychological motivation (carrot) or direct or indirect coercion (stick). Politicians typically apply all of these methods (except direct coercion) to accomplish their goals. Those who have obtained power positions are said to be authorities. In order to psychologically motivate individuals, you must occupy the legitimate position of an authority in a belief system.

In my life, I have encountered the following authorities: parents (who have authority from direct psychic motivation emanating from the care that is provided and direct coercion), Church leaders (who have authority primarily from direct psychic motivation and indirect psychic motivation of one's parents), government officals, police officers, guards, judges, supervisors/managers, etc.

The challenge for freedom loving individuals is to either not buy into the belief systems that confer authority upon authority figures (most effective with moral authority figures such as Church leaders), persuade others of the illegitimacy of the authority figures or the belief systems that establish their power positions, or play off one authoritarian system against another. It is correctly noted that atheist, non-religiously affiliated, or non-devout individuals are the only moral individuals because they make their own moral judgements. In societies with monolithic and intolerant religious organizations (such as the Catholics in Spain), the incumbent religious organization is quite corrupt and militant.

For the divide and conquer strategy to be effective no particular authority ought to have much more power than any other and there should be several competing authorities. The local judicial/police system should check the federal legislative/national guard system. Counties should be turned against states and police should balance the military and the national guard. The UN and states should check the power of the federal government. All attempts to coordinate/centralize these power centers should be fought. Given the current unwieldy power of the fed, individuals should push for state's rights.