What Is A Libertarian, Anyway?

Over the years (over 40 of 'em, in my case), I've bumped into advocates of quite a number of varying opinions as to just what libertarianism is. I've run into even more opinions of what libertarianism is by non-libertarians. Particularly, by conservatives.

We're crazy, drug-addled ne'er do wells who only want drugs legalized.....and those individuals do, in fact, exist. We're anarchists, desiring to tear down all the country's institutions and traditions.....those exist, as well. There are conservatives, who have moved away from the GOP in favor of capitalism and less intrusion by government into our lives.....I've spoken to many. There are leftists who've studied a little economics and see the flaws in the Democrat welfare state......yes, indeed. There are would-be mountain men, who just don't want to be involved at all, and others who would disappear into the Rockies if they only dared. Perhaps there are some living that way, even as we meeker fellows contemplate how to minimize local, state and federal theft of an ever larger portion of our productivity.

Libertarianism doesn't necessarily embrace every one of these ways of life. If I may, allow me to direct you toward an essay that's going to be the first chapter of a book by L Neil Smith and his daughter Rylla Cathryn Smith. The essay, called What Libertarians Believe, can be found here.

Since Mr Smith is the individual who, with the exception of Ayn Rand, has influenced me more than anyone else with his work, I don't hesitate to make his ideas known, to the best of my ability.

Libertarian is very simple, really. It's an acknowledgment of the sovereignty of the individual. It's a recognition that each of us owns his life and all the products thereof. It's simply an absence of initiated force.

Anyone who tells you otherwise is not a libertarian.

They've killed Freedom! Those bastards!

Warm regards,

Col. Hogan
Stalag California

Addendum:

In my haste to finish this entry and hit the sack last night, I neglected to mention what Smith calls the Zero Aggression Principle, (ZAP) which was first (in Smith's recollection) penned by Thomas Jefferson, and in mine, by Ayn Rand. ZAP is central to any real definition of libertarianism and required for any kind of a rational society. See Smith's essay, in which he explains ZAP more fully.

Not Enough Guns--Yet Again

It's very sad that I have to write about this again, so soon. It's even more sad that this scummy bastard was able to kill and injure as many individuals as he did.

I never concern myself much about why these subhumans do the things they do. Suffice it to say that the sooner they're dead, the better. As author L Neil often says, "The best death penalty is the one carried out by the presumed victim, in self defense, before the killer can fulfill his nefarious plan." Or words to that effect. Unfortunately, that was not what happened at Virgina Tech on April 16, 2007.

I happen, as many of you know, to be of the opinion that many, perhaps most, mass shootings would be nipped in the bud--maybe prior to the first murder--were there someone nearby with a handgun and the ability to use it effectively.

Educational facilities have the misfortune to have been declared "gun free zones," by the government. Basically, this means that anyone bent 'pon murder will find it a safe area in which to carry out his killings. In the case of the Virginia Tech massacre, the evil and plumb loco Cho Seung-Hui was able to murder thirty-two individuals before committing suicide. Most likely, were it general knowledge that students and faculty could legally carry concealed weapons on campus, many of these guys wouldn't even try. Suicidals, like Cho, don't care. With animals like them, well, they simply have to be stopped. Unarmed students and faculty, cowering under their desks, won't stop him.

If I seem cold, it's because I'm angry. I'm angry that thirty-two individuals, most of them young students, some of them heroic, were killed by a crazed misfit who didn't even have the common decency to go off into a corner by himself and blow his brains out in private.

According to a link provided by Samizdata, a Virginia state house bill, HB1572, that would've allowed concealed carry of firearms on school campi by individuals with permits, was introduced a little over a year ago. The bill died it committee, as reported by the Roanoke Times here. Had this bill passed, we might've seen a very different outcome of the Virginia Tech tragedy.

On the other hand, presenting the pro-let-the-killer-do-whatever-he-wants position, Virginia Tech Associate Vice President Larry Hincker, defending the university's victim-disarmament policy of banning guns on campus last summer, said, "Guns don't belong in classrooms. They never will. Virginia Tech has a very sound policy preventing same." I wonder if he still holds that position.

The US federal government, so far unable to eliminate the Second Amendment and enforce an outright ban on privately-owned firearms, has worked with state and local governments to hamstring private individuals, making effective self defense very difficult (in some cities and states, impossible). Governments of many other countries seem to actually want to see their honest citizens victimized by criminals.

Ok, harsh words. These are harsh words directed against those who are seemingly ok with the occasional killing of several students in places where self defense is deliberately and explicitly not allowed.

I don't think my anger is unjustified.

Warm regards,

Col. Hogan
Stalag California

Two Great Graphic Novels

I've mentioned this to some folks, and CC also mentioned it recently: Big Head Press has begun serializing a number of graphic novels, each of which is continued each week. Two of the stories are by L Neil Smith, my favorite Sci-Fi author.

The first is Neil's first novel, The Probability Broach. It's been over ten years since I first read the print novel, but the graphic novel, drawn by Scott Bieser, is a lot of fun.

The second, not yet released in print, is Roswell, Texas. This one, like TPB, is an "alternate universe" story. It's set in a universe in which Texas remains an independent nation, which requires its citizens to carry a sidearm for personal protection, unless they declare themselves conscientious objectors.

Both novels are a lot of fun, and offer the reader a view of a possible libertarian society.

I await each week's installment of each story with a great deal of anticipation, much as many of you ladies wait for the next episode of As The World turns.

They've killed Freedom! Those bastards!

Warm Regards,

Col. Hogan
Stalag California

America's Most Victimized (so far) Generation

I'm very proud, as many of you know, to be a huge fan and an acquaintance of Mr L Neil Smith. El Neil has written over twenty novels, every one of which I've read, most more than once. To me, he's second only to Ayn Rand, and a lot more fun.

Neil is still writing, and I eagerly await the publication of his next.

I've exchanged emails a few times with him, and have spoken to him on the phone a couple of times. A couple of years ago, I bumped into him at the Freedom Summit in Phoenix, and we had an hours-long conversation.

In spite of much of his fiery writing, such as that in the article I'm linking, He's an affable, mild-mannered fellow whom I'd be more than proud to call a friend. In fact, in spite of my very limited contact with him over the past several years, I will call him a friend!

I won't go into Neil's personal philosophy here, except to say that he's a libertarian's libertarian, and one of those current-day intellectuals who helps define the term.

Neil has just lost his mother, and has written a tribute to her, in his unique style, as well as to his previously deceased father and other members of their generation.

Please accept my deepest condolences for your loss, Neil.

My own limited ability to describe this essay compels me to merely link it, that you may judge for yourselves.

Death of a Generation, by L. Neil Smith

They've killed Freedom! Those bastards!

Warm regards,

Col. Hogan
Stalag California

Roswell, Texas?

My all-time favorite science fiction author is L Neil Smith. I actually grew up on Robert A Heinlein, and continue to re-read his stories occasionally, and I enjoy many other S-F authors as well, but I find myself watching and waiting for El Neil's next.

El Neil builds the worlds in which I would most like to live. From his first novel, The Probability Broach, which is currently in print both as a print novel and as a graphic novel (Art by Scott Bieser), is the first in an alternative history series that begins during a quirk of history during America's Revolutionary War. I could go on about the several subsequent novels Smith has written, including a couple of S-F/pirate swashbucklers, but nobody wants that!

What's new now is a graphic short story which is being serialized at Bighead Press. Roswell, Texas is another alternative history story, a "sci-fi western romantic comedy," based on a quirk of history during the Siege of the Alamo. Reading the first several pages reveals it to be a very interesting story, at least for me! I'm waiting impatiently for the next installment.

Remember, VOTE FOR NO INCUMBENT!

Warm Regards,

Col. Hogan
Stalag California

What Sci-Fi Space Ship Would Suit You?

The other day, Ice Scribe at My Gorram Den put me onto a quiz that's a bit o'fun. You can check it out at Quiz Farm.

Turns out that I'd be most comfortable aboard Moya (from Farscape) or, close behind, The Millennium Falcon (Star Wars). Having seen just a few episodes of Farscape, well, I liked it but it was filled with some certifiable bizzaros. I might fit right in!

I do like the Millennium Falcon, not only in the movies while Han Solo was at the helm, but in the L Neil Smith adventures while Lando Calrissian owned the ship.

So, take the quiz, if this sort of thing appeals to you. It's starting to look like freedom lies only in escape!

They've killed Freedom! Those bastards!

Warm regards,

Col. Hogan
Stalag California

A Standing Army

The job of the Army is to protect the United States from foreign attack. Prior to the end of WWII, the US didn't keep much of an army, except during wartime. The army was just enough to keep the bases up and the brass polished. When it was decided to send American troops to Europe to fight in WWI, we had to first get an army recruited and trained. They were trained by Indian fighters. Once over there, they had to be retrained to fight less effectively, to take more casualties, in the European tradition.

When FDR was finally able to get us into WWII, we again had to scramble to get an army together. After that war, I guess Truman decided we'd better keep an army ready just in case.

Well, just in case has happened many times since the end of WWII which, during the Viet Nam undeclared war, prompted many to observe correctly that, "if the government has a large standing army, the government will find uses for it."

There was Korea, the Cuban Blockade, Viet Nam, Grenada, Bosnia, Somalia, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Iraq again. Tell me if I've forgotten any. The earlier wars in this group were fought within the envelope of what Generals wistfully refer to as The Cold War. I'll have to remember to ask some of my biker buds how cold they thought it was during the battles at Pork Chop Hill and Tet.

Every one of these were undeclared wars. Seems that when we have a huge standing army with nothing to do but train to kill people and break things, declaring war somehow went out of fashion. When we want a war now, we just send the troops in and they start shooting.

L Neil Smith, my favorite sci-fi writer and world-class libertarian thinker, wrote an article that proposes a solution. He recognizes that it'll be hard to get Americans to decide to implement his idea, as do I, but we'll strive for it. Anything less will, at best, slow our motion in the direction toward totalitarianism.

I've long thought that, if the Roman Catholic church can squeek by with 10% titheing (we know how impoverished they are), the US federal government is getting way too much of our hard earned cash. That, of course, is not hot news to anybody.

My proposal, which falls in line with Neil's, is that government not be allowed to forcibly tax anyone. A radical proposal? Read the US Constitution. Prior to the adoption of the Sixteenth Amendment, the US government was not allowed to tax individuals. Scholars disagree as to whether or not the Sixteenth was properly adopted (I rather think corners were cut), and we all know that government was far more respectful of the rights of individuals before it started snooping into our finances and our professional lives.

The federal government even conducted the evil and very expensive War between the States without compulsory taxation of individuals.

Needless to say though, in the absence of compulsory taxation, there are many things the feds would have to stop doing. Most of the general population might be willing to tithe five or ten percent to government, but not much more than that.

One of the things government would have to do away with is the big standing army. One of the few proper functions of government, according to the Constitution, is to protect the country from foreign invasion. A small army with a well-thought-out set of state reserve militiae, would satisfy that function.

Doing away with the thousands of unConstitutional gun control laws, that every individual has the full right to defend himself against attackers, foreign and domestic, would help even more. Even the most severely self-deluded invaders will recognize the difficulty of seizing territory, a few square feet at a time, from millions of armed individuals.

There is one Amendment to the Constitution I'd like to see. It'd take away all the incentive for the intergovernment discussions that lead to war: The federal government must be barred from any diplomatic relations with other nations. The federal government should restrict itself to maintaining a skeleton military, a system of courts and police. While I have no quarrel with the military sending agents out to gather intelligence from potential foes, the word should be defense.

Diplomatic relations can and should be initiated and maintained by international buyers and sellers of commodities. Who better? I'd bet my savings, could the truth be shown, that Shell, Standard, BP and other oil companies would not have made such a mess of American-Arab relations had government not been involved. And when I say not involved, I mean that each entire transaction is initiated, negotiated and consummated entirely by the oil company reps and the Arabs in control of oil sales. No government.

No government! What a concept!

They've killed Freedom! Those bastards!

Warm regards,

Col. Hogan
Stalag California