How Would the Gulch Not Devolve Into Statism?
Posted by CircuitGuy 10 years, 1 month ago to Government
Talking about my question of *where* a Gulch could be located, Lana wrote "Maybe the real first step is to form a group of serious members and outline the goals of such a community."
That made me realize I'm not even sure what a Gulch government would be like. Suppose somehow a libertarian state comes into existence. How would it be different from the US?:
1. Self-reliance - The first generation there would be self-reliant by definition. The struggle would be pass those values to all the children.
2. Regulations - Maybe some things that are handled by regulations would be handled by courts in the Gulch. Regulations in the US control things that used to be settled by litigation, making the US less litigious than it used to be. Would the Gulch keep some regulations but keep them more narrowly focused on activities that have a clear proven cost on others?
3. Taxes - Most people who think taxes are too high want to maintain spending on at least one of the three largest areas of spending: military, Social Security / Medicare, Welfare for the poor. It's a cliche that politicians like to say "I'll balance the budget without raising taxes, or touching Social Security or the military," Unless we agree to cut all those things, there need to be separate Gulches. That means when some evildoers are laying the possible foundation for WWIII, our response has to be, “we have a small army supported by minutemen if the evildoers come here.” If grandma becomes paralyzed by a stroke, the family and maybe people from her church get ready to open their pocketbooks or provide care once she spends through her $200k life savings in four year's time. I say people can rise to those occasions, but would we have to resist the temptation to look to gov't for a solution.
4. Weapons - In my mind there's a continuum between banning mild weapons such as pepper spray and allowing people to build weapons of mass destruction. Most Gulch citizens would want to allow shotguns, semi-auto rifles, and handguns. There might be debate about someone who wants to protect his house with a UAV equipped with high explosives. If there were a Gulch would the same gun debate persist but just about different weapons?
5. War on Drugs / Terror – The simple solution is to treat drugs as a medical problem for those who seek addiction treatment and treat “terrorism” as a criminal problem using the same court system that tries people who commit murders for more quotidian motives, e.g. to get the insurance money. Would everyone buy into that?
6. Disgusting Behavior – Disgusting behavior is grown adults flirting with 12 y/o boys and girls, someone contacting the family of a murder victim claiming to know how the victim died as cruel prank, lewd behavior in public, burning flags or other items held as sacred to get attention, drawing pictures glamorizing rape, incest, murder, etc. Do we just allow these things as the price of liberty? Do we state somehow in the Constitution, we won't give in and start using force to stop disgusting behavior.
Suddenly I think the biggest problem with Gulch is NOT where to hide it or how to coexist with existing power structures. It's how not to slide back to statism. On all six (6) of those issues, I can see us going from a very free society to right back where we are-- a little island micronation with moderately high taxes, with half the taxes going to defense, and half going to social spending, and all other gov't functions sustained through borrowing. The same people who defend their right to have an automatic rifle, want men with guns to protect the children from drugs and other human problems. That's depressing. If you tell me, "but taxes would be 25% less b/c we wouldn't be buying baby formula for some irresponsible single parents and we wouldn't be subsidizing grandma's medical care," it doesn't make it that much less depressing. Great, instead of sending 40% of our profits in fed and state quarterly estimates, we get to send 30% of our profits. That's a small step toward liberty, but not libertarian paradise.
If I want a liberal paradise where the vast majority are politically liberal, work in jobs related to research, science, and technology, and believe in respecting civil liberties even for unpopular things like polyamory, I already live there. My luck I was born here. I have heard there are rightwing versions all over. How do we get the libertarian version?
Even assuming the Gulch magically existed in the open and other gov't's and peoples of the world left it alone and never attempted to meddle, how would we keep the Gulch from devolving into statism?
That made me realize I'm not even sure what a Gulch government would be like. Suppose somehow a libertarian state comes into existence. How would it be different from the US?:
1. Self-reliance - The first generation there would be self-reliant by definition. The struggle would be pass those values to all the children.
2. Regulations - Maybe some things that are handled by regulations would be handled by courts in the Gulch. Regulations in the US control things that used to be settled by litigation, making the US less litigious than it used to be. Would the Gulch keep some regulations but keep them more narrowly focused on activities that have a clear proven cost on others?
3. Taxes - Most people who think taxes are too high want to maintain spending on at least one of the three largest areas of spending: military, Social Security / Medicare, Welfare for the poor. It's a cliche that politicians like to say "I'll balance the budget without raising taxes, or touching Social Security or the military," Unless we agree to cut all those things, there need to be separate Gulches. That means when some evildoers are laying the possible foundation for WWIII, our response has to be, “we have a small army supported by minutemen if the evildoers come here.” If grandma becomes paralyzed by a stroke, the family and maybe people from her church get ready to open their pocketbooks or provide care once she spends through her $200k life savings in four year's time. I say people can rise to those occasions, but would we have to resist the temptation to look to gov't for a solution.
4. Weapons - In my mind there's a continuum between banning mild weapons such as pepper spray and allowing people to build weapons of mass destruction. Most Gulch citizens would want to allow shotguns, semi-auto rifles, and handguns. There might be debate about someone who wants to protect his house with a UAV equipped with high explosives. If there were a Gulch would the same gun debate persist but just about different weapons?
5. War on Drugs / Terror – The simple solution is to treat drugs as a medical problem for those who seek addiction treatment and treat “terrorism” as a criminal problem using the same court system that tries people who commit murders for more quotidian motives, e.g. to get the insurance money. Would everyone buy into that?
6. Disgusting Behavior – Disgusting behavior is grown adults flirting with 12 y/o boys and girls, someone contacting the family of a murder victim claiming to know how the victim died as cruel prank, lewd behavior in public, burning flags or other items held as sacred to get attention, drawing pictures glamorizing rape, incest, murder, etc. Do we just allow these things as the price of liberty? Do we state somehow in the Constitution, we won't give in and start using force to stop disgusting behavior.
Suddenly I think the biggest problem with Gulch is NOT where to hide it or how to coexist with existing power structures. It's how not to slide back to statism. On all six (6) of those issues, I can see us going from a very free society to right back where we are-- a little island micronation with moderately high taxes, with half the taxes going to defense, and half going to social spending, and all other gov't functions sustained through borrowing. The same people who defend their right to have an automatic rifle, want men with guns to protect the children from drugs and other human problems. That's depressing. If you tell me, "but taxes would be 25% less b/c we wouldn't be buying baby formula for some irresponsible single parents and we wouldn't be subsidizing grandma's medical care," it doesn't make it that much less depressing. Great, instead of sending 40% of our profits in fed and state quarterly estimates, we get to send 30% of our profits. That's a small step toward liberty, but not libertarian paradise.
If I want a liberal paradise where the vast majority are politically liberal, work in jobs related to research, science, and technology, and believe in respecting civil liberties even for unpopular things like polyamory, I already live there. My luck I was born here. I have heard there are rightwing versions all over. How do we get the libertarian version?
Even assuming the Gulch magically existed in the open and other gov't's and peoples of the world left it alone and never attempted to meddle, how would we keep the Gulch from devolving into statism?
And speaking of my novel, Atlas Snubbed, it directly addresses the methods used by Eddie Willers for dealing with each of your numbered points:
1. Self-reliance: A given, as you point out. Since Galt's strike resulted in the deaths of millions, the survivors would HAVE to be self-reliant.
2. Regulation: This is the third of three main political points Atlas Snubbed is out to make, specifically, the Separation of Regulation and State. Eddie sets up a voluntary framework for all sorts of regulations where individuals decide for themselves exactly which ones they want to embrace. And yes, it can lead to some sorts of torts when things go awry, but that is covered by the second main political points of the book, the Separation of Courts and State.
3. Taxes: Taxation is theft, pure and simple, regardless of any $200,000 medical bill for granny. Objectivism is pretty cold-hearted on the subject of charity, but how Society deals with that is the most important of the three major political points of the book, specifically, the Separation of Society and State. That approach becomes the norm in my novel for the world Outside, but it's also used inside the Gulch for things like traffic lights.
4. Weapons: To quote a phrase from the Pennsylvania Constitution, people are "responsible for the abuse of that liberty." See "2. Regulation" above. No difference.
5. War on Drugs/Terror: See "4. Weapons" above. Regardless of what human behavior you speak of, dealing with it all falls under the same mantra: "You have the inalienable right to live your life your way, without interference, provided you respect the rights and property of others." That mantra is the overarching message of Atlas Snubbed. Society's reaction to regulation, taxes, weapons, drugs, etc. stems from it. Even the reaction to...
6. Disgusting behavior. I added a whole half a chapter about sex and children at the suggestion of Thomas Knapp (2008 VP candidate for the Boston Tea Party) in light of what happened to poor Mary Ruwart's presidential campaign over the topic.
Bottom line: Without Galt's religious... uh, I mean PHILOSOPHICAL edicts, the world outside the Gulch is always prone to creeping statism. But as for the Gulch itself, let me quote Frank Herbert's novel, Dune: "When religion and politics travel in the same cart, the riders believe nothing can stand in their way. Their movement become headlong -- faster and faster and faster. They put aside all thought of obstacles and forget that a precipice does not show itself to the man in a blind rush until it's too late." Sounds like a good theme for a sequel to Atlas Shrugged!
I agree with all of it except I like our monetary system and I don't think the problems I lay out are caused by irrational behavior. Let's set aside the monetary question and focus on irrationality.
It seems rational to have gov't doing some of the same things our gov't does, just not out of control and accounting for a a huge chunk of GDP. This is plausible, since we spend most of our money on defense, and maybe just having everyone armed with a high-power rifle along with a minimal army might provide the same level of protection. My question, though, is isn't this just a smaller less-intrusive version of the gov't we have. Maybe the answer is yes, and that's a good enough cause to create a Gulch over. If so, Gulch residents would have to guard vigilantly against creeping expansion of gov't.
Would everyone, generation after generation, maintain citizenship in some country so the Gulch would have a place to repatriate them if they refused to follow the ways the Gulch?
The problem I have with bitcoin (not that it isn't a great idea) is that it has no intrinsic value. That concerns me as to its long term viability. And let's just admit that bitcoins are every bit as manufactured as the current US dollar - just not by a quasi-governmental entity.
if someone joined me, we'd barter and divide tasks. if more joined us, we'd volunteer and agree to the division of tasks. if a full voluntary system were agreed to, then "donations" would be substituted for taxes.
the extension of this requires that non-agreed people (children, e.g.) be kept within the protected envelope.
if I suddenly decided not to agree, I would have to leave. the implication is that anyone attaining the "age of majority" would have to take an oath of agreement with the group, and if someone did not want to take the oath, then goodbye.
the vertical extrapolation of this requires that the "agreement" become a constitution, and that the oath be taken with a representative of the group alliance ... representative democracy? donations required, else I incur a lifetime debt for defense, representation and barter-result note-taking people called judges?
just a way to look at this -- from the most basic position forward!
p.s. never allow a Federal Reserve!!!
I would gladly accept (not agree) with all of these. i think #2 is simplistic b/c just having a flat rate doesn't simplify thing. Calculating income is what's complicated. The rate is a simple calculation. This whole thing is an artifice of those who want to the rich to pay less under guise of simplification.
Anyway, I would gladly adopt the whole program for the US. I'd rather err on the side of less gov't power, esp with US in serious trouble for excessive gov't power.
Would other gov't of the world have a legitimate complaint in saying you banish all irrational people to use and drain away our most productive? Maybe they want to banish their unproductive to your Gulch. This would lead to conflict.
At the optometrist's office this week, I asked him if he wanted to be forced to live above a downtown business. He said he was a city boy. I asked if he wanted his kids in that location. "No, I want them to have a yard and a pool." - which they do have. See how easily people fail to think things through without prompting?
1) strict limiting of the areas the government can be involved in at all. Much stricter than Constitution.
2) simplified fixed flat tax on income over some inflation adjusted amount to support agreed government functions. No changes in rate. No exemptions. No big bureaucracy to manage it all.
3) Only things that are effectively initiation of force or fraud on others, that at least can be shown to harm others, are crimes. All criminal prosecutions made on any other grounds are null and void. All laws and regulations that do not have this characteristic are rescinded.
4) The people are secure in ALL there papers and effects including electronic ones. No government roundups of citizen data without specific sufficient and warrant specifying what is to be searched are allowed.
5) No "policing the world" by government.
6) Separation of economy and state.
7) Separation of education and state.
8) Separation of science and state.
There needs to be someone who looks out for the good of the gulch with well thought out strategies, like lawyers hired to protect the interests of the corporation. There are so many dangers to such a community.
Load more comments...