Deep Libertarian Thoughts on Free Market Exchange

Instead of seeing exchange as one event of give and take, see it as two distinct events: A gives B something. B gives A something. Two people are separately giving to each other. The reason for it is all in your head. Forget the reason. Just look at what’s happening. Two people are freely giving to each other, connecting, and benefiting.

We look at the event too much as a give and take, and that is what trips us up into thinking one is taking advantage of the other, or there is a more powerful and less powerful party to the transaction. But if we just observe what’s happening, we can get rid of all that. One person gives. The other person gives. The result is peace.

The only difference between charitable giving and a market exchange is that in an exchange, there are two givers, and they each have a reason for giving. In a charitable donation, there is only one giver, and only he has a reason for giving. The other party is passive.

The reason for a market exchange is a shared interest between the two. It’s what connects them. This puts market exchanges above simple charitable giving on a moral sphere, because the market connects humanity, while giving does not necessarily do so. It can, but giving does not have to connect giver and receiver. An exchange necessarily does. The market necessarily does. It requires reciprocation. Charitable giving does not.

Then why is charitable giving a mitzva? The only reason I can think of is a גזירת הכתוב. Which means there is no rational reason, which makes sense considering there is a Rabbinic limit to charitable giving at 20%. Any more and giving is considered a sin.

Rav Sa’adaya Gaon, at the beginning of אמונות ודעות, the Book of Beliefs and Opinions, pretty much the first complete work dedicated to Jewish philosophy ever written circa 800 CE – Sa’adya observes that if everyone stole from everyone else, there would be no productivity and all of humanity would starve.

That extends to charitable giving. The more people that give without reciprocity, the less production you have. The market requires production from both sides of the exchange in every exchange. Otherwise the exchange is not made. The more charity you have in the world, the less wealth, because charity does not require both parties to produce. It is unilateral. At a certain saturation point then, charitable giving harms humanity. Rabbinically, that point is 20%.

Visually too, indirect exchange through a monetary medium necessarily connects humanity, not just via the two making the exchange itself, but due to the nature of the monetary medium it forces the receiver of money to exchange with yet another person in the future.

If you see the specific good in the exchange as the point of a cone, and then the money as the funnel, the funnel of the cone sits over the seller of the good, who is the receiver of money. The point of the cone sits over the buyer. The buyer gives money to the seller. The cone opens up to a third person, because the money received must then be exchanged with another person. Otherwise the money is worthless. The buyer is in effect pointing the seller in the direction of someone else – anyone else really, urging him to further exchange and add wealth to humanity using the money he has just given the seller.

A quote from Chef, starring Jon Favreau, demonstrates this. The chef is talking to his son, who tried to lazily give a burnt sandwich to a customer:

“I may not be the best husband in the world and I’m sorry if I wasn’t the best father. But I’m good at this, and I want to share this with you. I want to teach you what I learned. I get to touch people’s lives with what I do. And it keeps me going and I love it. And I think if you give it a shot you might love it too. Now, should we have served that sandwich?”

How to Defend Army Privatization

Today some guy who heads the Israel Defense Forces, I forgot his name and I don’t care to look it up, had the great idea (really great idea, no sarcasm) of getting rid of Army Radio.  It’s causing a stir here because people here think it’s normal for an army to control the media. Literally. The army has its own radio station. On it, idiots blather about all the dumb nonsense that all the politicians say all the time.

Now, that an army should not manage a radio station is shooting fish in a barrel. It’s mainly there to stick unwilling draftees who don’t want to do anything so they sit at Galatz and doodle pictures of fish or something.

The harder thing is to argue for a private army. Some guy commented on a post I wrote a long time ago on why the IDF should be privatized. He said the following:

I thought you were cool.  A private army would make a lot more money just confiscating people’s houses than on the people’s generous donations.  That’s why there is an elected civilian making these decisions.

This is how I responded.

It’s hard to confiscate houses when there are competing companies that are equally armed, protecting their clients’ houses. It would start a war, and that would deplete capital, wouldn’t work. What could work though if they wanted to confiscate houses is they could all work together and form a single army and then there would be no competition. They could just take the houses then, but it would be more efficient if they just took a cut of everyone’s salary in a giant protection racket, letting them keep their houses so as to live off the production.

They could even rename the protection racket a “social contract” and call the theft “taxes” and everyone would cheer them and thank them too.

Gosh that sounds familiar.

Let’s all realize that we already are conquered by our own governments. The only way competing private armies could possibly take over your property is if they teamed up together as a monopoly. And the only way private armies would team up in a cartel is if a government forced it. They can and often do take your property, especially in Israel. Consider 2005 Gush Katif and the northern Shomron where the army destroyed an entire city and left 10,000 people homeless.

They can do it. They can do it with impunity. Because it is a cartel. They can do it because there is no competition. Just wholesale destruction and suicide.

If Gaza’s Jews had their own private army to protect them against the government’s IDF, the IDF would have backed down. They would not have risked a civil war with Gaza’s Jewish community. The vast majority of Jews would not have stood for it, and the invading IDF would have laid down its own weapons rather than slaughter Gaza’s Jews. In the end, nothing would have happened. It would have been a standoff, and then it would have been over, and Gush Katif and the North Shomron would still be standing.

Except in the current scenario, where the government has a monopoly on the army supply, the entire community has been destroyed.

So if you want the army to be able to just take your property and destroy it, make sure it is a monopoly army controlled by an elected official. Otherwise, go private.

 

How a Libertarian Israel would Deal with Stabbers

I get this question a lot. If there is no government how do you deal with stabbers and murderers, and attempted murderers? Wouldn’t an anarcho-capitalist society just fall apart in chaos?

Well, what they do now is destroy the home of the guy that did the stabbing, and that is the best we can hope for. This is a total waste of capital. In a private property society, the owner of the property on which the crime was committed, whether it is a sidewalk, a street, a park, whatever, would have his private insurance company apprehend the criminal, but what would likely happen is armed citizens would apprehend him, or kill him. If he survived, he would be tried in a private court very quickly. If convicted, his assets would go to the victim according to Perek HaChovel. If he did not survive, any assets go to the victim. Instead of destroying the guy’s house, it would be sold to the victim who could do with it whatever he wanted.

If Arabs had their houses handed over to a Jew after a stabbing, they wouldn’t stab. What the hell is the logic of destroying a house when it can be easily given over to the victim?

If the criminal had no assets, he would be his victim’s slave until the debt is repaid. A slave does not mean he is in the the victim’s house, because who would want his would-be murderer hanging out with him? His slave meaning whatever he earns, those wages are garnished and given to the victim until everything is repaid. If he was killed and had no assets, then nothing can be done. He’s dead, that’s enough, especially considering what happens now. Which is he is rescued, sent to a government hospital for taxpayer funded medical care, sent to a government prison for taxpayer funded housing and food, and then released when the next government soldier is kidnapped and exchanged for a bunch of murderers.

 

 

Judaism’s main anarchic source, Midrash Rabbah Shoftim

People have been asking me for this. Here it is. I will translate it in a follow up post.

זה שאמר הכתוב (איוב לד): ממלוך אדם חנף ממוקשי עם.

רבי יוחנן וריש לקיש, רבי יוחנן אמר: אם ראית חנף ורשע מנהיג את הדור, נוח לו לדור לפרוח באוויר ולא להשתמש בו, ואין הלשון הזה ממוקשי עם אלא לפרוח, כעניין שנאמר (עמוס ג): התפול צפור על פח הארץ ומוקש אין לה?!

ממלוך אדם חנף וגו’.

רבנין אמרי: כיון שעמדו מלכים על ישראל והתחילו משעבדין בהן, אמר הקב”ה: לא אתם עזבתם אותי ובקשתם לכם מלכים?!
הוי, אשימה עלי מלך.
זה שאמר הכתוב (תהלים קמו): אל תבטחו בנדיבים וגו’.

אמר רבי סימון, בשם רבי יהושע בן לוי: כל מי שבוטח בהקב”ה זוכה להיות כיוצא בו.
מנין?

שנא’ (ירמיה יז): ברוך הגבר אשר יבטח בה’ והיה ה’ מבטחו.
אבל כל מי שיבטח בעבודת כוכבים, נתחייב להיות כיוצא בה.
מנין?

שנאמר (תהלים קטו): כמוהם יהיו עושיהם.

רבנן אמרי: כל מי שנשען בבשר ודם עובר אף פרוסטיא שלו עוברת, שנאמר (שם קמו): בבן אדם שאין לו תשועה.
מה כתיב אחריו?

תצא רוחו ישוב לאדמתו.

אמר הקב”ה: ויודעין שאין בשר ודם כלום ומניחין כבודי ואומרין: שימה לנו מלך?!
מה אתם מבקשין מלך?

חייכם! שסופכם להרגיש מה עתיד להגיע לכם מתחת מלככם.
מנין?

שנאמר (הושע ז) כל מלכיהם נפלו אין קורא בהם אלי:

י [גודל החטא והעונש על לשון הרע]

דבר אחר:
ואמרת אשימה עלי מלך

אמר רבי יהודה ברבי אלעאי: על ג’ דברים נצטוו ישראל בכניסתן לארץ, ואלו הן:
למחות זכרו של עמלק,
ולמנות להם מלך,
ולבנות להם בהמ”ק.

ומינו להם מלך ומיחו זכרו של עמלק,
ולמה לא בנו להן בהמ”ק?

שהיו ביניהם דילטורין.
תדע לך, דאמר רבי שמואל בר נחמן: דורו של אחאב עובדי עבודת כוכבים היו, והיו יוצאין למלחמה ונוצחין.
ולמה כן?

שלא היה ביניהן דילטורין. לפיכך היו יוצאין למלחמה ונוצחין.
תדע לך כשבקשה איזבל להרוג כל נביאי ה’, מה עשה עובדיה?
הטמין אותן במערות, שנאמר (מלכים א יח): ואחביא מנביאי ה’ חמשים איש במערה, ולא היה אדם שאמר לאחאב כך וכך עשה עובדיה.
אבל דורו של שאול כולן היו דילטורין. תדע לך, כשהיה שאול רודף אחר דוד, היו הכל אומרים עליו לשון הרע לשאול, שנא’ (תהלים נב): בבוא דואג האדומי וגו’.
( שם נד) בבוא הזיפים ויאמרו לשאול. לפיכך, היו נופלים במלחמה.

דבר אחר:

אמר רב מינא: כל שאומר לשון הרע מסלק השכינה מלמטה למעלה.
תדע לך, מה דוד אומר?
(שם נז) נפשי בתוך לבאים אשכבה לוהטים בני אדם שיניהם חנית וחצים ולשונם חרב חדה.
מה כתיב אחריו?

(שם) רומה על השמים אלהים וגו’.
אמר דוד: רבש”ע! מה השכינה עושה למטה?!
סלק את השכינה לרקיע!

דבר אחר:

אמר רבי שמואל בר נחמן:
למה נקרא שמו של לשון הרע, לשון שלישי?

שהוא הורג שלשה:
שאמרו,
והמקבלו,
ושנאמר עליו.

מנין?

דואג שאמרו,
ושאול שקיבלו,
ונוב עיר הכהנים, שנאמר עליהן.

דבר אחר:

אמר רבי שמואל בר נחמן: שאלו לנחש ואמרו ליה:
למה אתה מצוי בין הגדרות?

אמר להן: שפרצתי גדרו של עולם!
אמרו לו: ולמה אתה מהלך בארץ ולשונך שותת בארץ?
אמר להן: שהוא גרם לי שאמרתי לשון הרע על בוראי.
ומה היה הלשון הרע?

אמר רבי יהושע דסיכנין, בשם רבי לוי: הנחש הראשון היה מסיח כבני אדם. כיון שלא היו אדם וחוה מבקשין לאכול מאותו אילן, התחיל לומר לשון הרע על בוראו.
אמר להן: מן האילן הזה אכל הבורא וברא את עולמו וציווה אתכם שלא תאכלו ממנו ותבראו עולם אחר.
ומה עשה לו הקב”ה?

קצץ את רגליו וכרת את לשונו, שלא יהא מסיח.

דבר אחר:

שאלו לנחש, אמרו לו:
מה אתה נהנה, שאתה נושך?

אמר להם: עד שאתם שואלין אותי למה, אין אתם שואלין לבעלי לשון הרע?!
שנאמר (קהלת י): אם ישך הנחש בלא לחש ואין יתרון לבעל הלשון.
מה נהנה?

שאומר לשון הרע.

דבר אחר:

אמרו לנחש: למה אתה נושך באבר אחד וארסך מהלך בכל האיברים?
אמר להן: עד שאתם שואלין אותי למה אין אתם שואלין לבעלי הלשון, שעומד ברומי והורג בסוריה, עומד בסוריה והורג ברומי!
ראה כמה קשה כוחו של לשון הרע, שנצטוו לבנות בהמ”ק ובשביל שהיה הדור בעלי לשון הרע, לא נבנה בימיהם:

יא [ישראל מבקשים את מלכות ה’ עליהם]

דבר אחר:
אשימה עלי מלך

רבנן אמרי: אמר הקב”ה: בעוה”ז בקשתם מלכים ועמדו המלכים מישראל והפילו אתכם בחרב.
שאול הפילם בהר הגלבוע.
מנין?

( ש”א ד) נס ישראל מפני פלשתים וגו’.
דוד, נתן מגפה, שנא’ ( ש”ב כד): ויתן ה’ דבר בישראל.
אחאב, עצר עליהן את הגשמים, שנא’ (מלכים א יז): אם יהיה השנים האלה טל ומטר וגו’. צדקיהו, החריב את בהמ”ק, כיון שראו ישראל מה הגיע מתחת ידי מלכיהם התחילו צווחין הכל: אין אנו מבקשין מלך ישראל, למלכנו הראשון אנו מבקשין (ישעיה לג): כי ה’ שופטנו ה’ מחוקקנו ה’ מלכנו הוא יושיענו.
אמר להם הקב”ה: חייכם! כך אני עושה.
מנין?

שנאמר ( זכריה יד): והיה ה’ למלך על כל הארץ וגו’:

Shmuly Yanklowitz Supports Human Organ Sales!

Wow!

Shock and awe!

I checked Rabbi Shmuly Yanklowitz’s facebook page for I don’t know what reason. I almost never do that. I don’t know why I did just now. And THIS is what I find! Shmuly Yanklowitz now supports a market for human organs! My God. I’m so happy my eyes are welling up. As you’ll see in this paragraph, he also hints he would support the legalization of sex work, which would ALSO save many many lives. Who knows how many. The article is titled “We Badly Need More Donated Kidneys. Let’s Start Paying For Them”. It fills me with hope.

In this worst of all possible worlds, only black-market incentives are offered. Since underground organ sales are happening en masse, we must look deep inside and ask vital questions: how can we re-channel this exploitative industry to one that ensures the health of the donor? How can these people be adequately protected in the procedure in such a way that non-coercive consent is ensured? How can exorbitant profit opportunities for organ brokers be eliminated? How do we ensure a level playing field to ensure fair distribution of donated organs? Those who support the prohibition of offering incentives think it will prevent the enormous ills of this abusive black market. But like the prohibition of sex work, it has failed. Miserably.

I now ask his forgiveness publicly. And I hope that my incessant, and admittedly vicious attacks against him were part of the calculus that inspired this reversal.

 

He still needs to reverse his positions on equal work equal pay, sweat shops, minimum wage and general infatuation with government, but organ sales are much more important than any of that.

The next most important issue is his warmongering and encouragement of weapons trafficking to terrorists. Maybe he’ll reverse that as well at some point, but I’m done attacking him. Mission accomplished.

Even the most ardent Statists can change for the better. There is hope for the world.

Intimations of Anarchic Libertarianism in the Shmoneh Esrei

I’ve already gone into how and why I don’t say את צמח דוד in my personal Shmoneh Esrei (silent prayer of 18 blessings). This is the bracha (blessing) for the Davidic monarchy, which I don’t want so I don’t pray for it. The blessing is an addition over the original, which makes the original 18 a new 19, according to the Yerushalmi Talmud.

I’ve also said that anarchy did exist in Jewish history, and it was the most peaceful period of Jewish history ever. That was the time of the Shoftim, who were popularly chosen and sanctioned by God, with no other government or taxes to speak of. There was not even a tax-funded army during that period. It was nearly perfect, as perfect as human history can be. There were a few skirmishes, but nothing compared to the constant wars of the period of the Kings, and no civil wars either.

Read the book and it is misleading, because it covers the skirmishes only. But between each story there is a single pasuk that says, וישקט הארץ שמונים שנה, or sometimes ארבעים שנה. Meaning, the land was quiet for 80 years, or sometimes just 40. Can you imagine that? 80 years of pure absolute peace? Nothing to write about, nothing to talk about, just live your life, worship God, enjoy your friends and family, celebrate the holidays, just live life? 80 years back then is 2 lifetimes. 3 generations. Imagine no wars for 3 generations, no taxes, nothing. Unbelievable.

I’m often challenged that if I love small government then why not move to the wilderness? The answer is because I love capital equipment more than small government. If I have capital equipment that can produce 10x and the government takes 5x, I’m left with 5x. If I’m in the wilderness with no capital equipment and I can only produce 1x with my hands, then I only have 1x. Therefore, I’d rather live in a big government society with more capital equipment than in an anarchy with zero.

But if someone would give me a time machine to go back to one of those 80 year periods during the Shoftim, wow would I be tempted to actually push the button and spend the rest of my life there, despite less capital. If I could take my family and they agreed, I may do it. Fantasyland yes, but a principle.

I yearn for the period of the Shoftim to return. That is what I want, that is what I long for.

Thank God it is now Aseret Yemei Teshuva (the Ten Days of Repentance) because it forces you to pay more attention to what you’re saying. There is one bracha that changes slightly during the 10 days, and that is השיבה שופטינו, or “Restore our judges.” The end changes from “Blessed is the King who loves righteousness and justice” to “Blessed is the King of Justice.” So you have to slow down when you get to it so you don’t say the normal formula.

And when you slow down, you can start to realize things.

Here’s the whole text:

השיבה שופטינו כבראשונה, ויועצינו כבתחילה, והסר ממנו יגון ואנחה, ומלוך עלינו אתה לבדך בחסד וברחמים, וצדקני במשפט. ברוך אתה יהוה, המלך המשפט.

Restore our judges as in the earliest times, and our counselors as at the beginning. Remove from us sorrow and pain, and reign over us – you God alone – with kindness and compassion, and make us just through your justice. Blessed are you God, the King of Justice.

For some reason on Motzei Shabbos (the end of the Sabbath) last night, something clicked. This is a prayer for the restoration of the period of the Judges. Not the monarchy, the anarchy, the Judges. It is so clear now. The “judges” in the blessing are not some Rabbi who sits on a Beis Din (court) under David. It’s talking about the period of the Shoftim, that period when there was no king at all. No government in charge of defense, and no government in charge of justice. Both defense and justice were private industries back then.

The evidence is in the language of the Bracha – the “earliest times” – before a king. That only God should reign over us, alone, meaning no king. Counselors, voluntary, not kings. This is now my favorite bracha. I will say it with extra kavana now. It only took me 20 years or so of saying it to figure this out.

To all the monarchists out there, yes, David is mentioned too in the Shmoneh Esrei. There are both minarchic and anarchic sources in Judaism. We pick what we prefer. If what we need is a privately funded Davidic figurehead to rally the people, which I see as very possible, then fine. He can have a donated throne. I’ll donate it. But no taxes.

That’s as far as I’ll go with a request for the return of David’s line.

Barry Freundel Issues Apology, But Were his Actions a Crime?

First off, Freundel’s actions were absolutely a crime against God, and a חילול השם of the first order. I don’t know if God will forgive him for what he did. But is being a peeping Tom really a crime? It depends on the circumstances.

In Defending the Undefendable II: Freedom in All Realms, Dr. Walter Block has a chapter on Peeing Toms. I have not read it yet, but from the snippets my wife reads to me, it seems that being a peeping Tom is not necessarily a crime. If it were, then looking a woman up and down would be a punishable offence. Men do this all the time, without even realizing it most of the time. I do it myself, admittedly, it’s just instinct. To deny it would just be stupid.

When straight men see an attractive woman, we all look at her sexually. The question is how fast we get back to our senses and the real world, and suppress it towards more appropriate outlets. The sickos don’t, the functional men do. That’s the way the human race works.

I would say, without reading what Dr. Block has written yet, that being a Peeping Tom in public places is definitely not a crime. It becomes a little more difficult if you’re looking through someone’s window into a private residence. But then again, it is up to the owners of the home to leave their shades up or down. If you’re leaving your shades up and someone with binoculars is looking into your home, it’s your problem. You should have left your shades down.

But, if someone plants a camera in your home to look at you no matter what you’re doing, naked or not, it is an actual crime, by libertarian standards. The crime is not “being a Peeping Tom”, but trespassing private property. It doesn’t matter what you see. It’s all a crime.

However, if a wife were to install a hidden camera in a husband’s bedroom suspecting he were having an affair, since the bedroom is her property, no crime.

In that sense, what Frendel did was an objective crime, assuming that the Mikveh he peeped on had privacy written or implied in the contract or verbally by whoever was supervising it, which was him. I’m assuming the mikveh did have that contract.

Freundel’s apology seems sincere. Forgiveness is not a requirement until certain prescriptions are fulfilled, which include bringing groups of people to each victim and begging three times. Freundel’s victims are under no responsibility to forgive, yet.

But keep in mind, there are much worse crimes than voyeurism, that are much more damaging, by Rabbis that are seen as social justice saints. I would consider crimes that lead to death as much worse, like advocating against organ donation, for example. Or being the Chief Rabbi of Israel and living off of stolen money.

As bad as Freundel’s חילול השם was, people recognize it as the actions of a single flawed human being, and can eventually write it off as not representing “Judaism” whatever that is. But the actions of an entire bureaucracy of tax-receiving Rabbis is much worse. That is an entire institution that lives off the livelihood of others that millions of people hate with a passion that will not end.

The Rabbinate is much worse than Barry Freundel. Let’s keep that in mind. In terms of halachic observance, if that is your value, the Rabbinate inflicts much more damage than a Peeping Tom.

Libertarian Summer Wrap Up So Far

I’m on vacation so less writing and more vegging out. Here’s a rundown of recent goings on, off the top of my head.

Murdering people celebrating homosexuality is wrong. The solution is not a government education program that will teach people that murdering gay people is wrong. The solution is to privatize the public roads so these parades take place on private property only and so nobody who opposes them is forced to fund them. Also to privatize the police and courts so that a guy who was previously convicted of attempted murder of gay people during their parade is not released while he makes public statements that everyone should stab gay people at their parade. And prisons should be privatized so the inmate must pay for his own incarceration through slavery rather than having me pay to give criminals free rent.

Donald Trump is the embodiment of the frustrated American whose standard of living is in decline who doesn’t know why it’s happening but wants to blame China. Trump might actually try to start a war with them, or Russia, or both. He could end up killing a lot of people.

Venezuela is collapsing in hyperinflation, to the collective yawn of every other country that has a government monopoly system of paper money.

China is on its way down again, with a big 10% decline in one day this week.

Money supply growth has now been stalled for 15 weeks. In 2008 it was 22 weeks. But on a longer term average it is now very close to actually shrinking.

I saw the Rabbi of a shul here in Miami who gave me a yasher koach (congratulations) for calling out Shmuly Yanklowitz for his organ donation stunt which, among other things, was meant to promote government laws against a free market in organs.

Another guy forwarded me a recent Yanklowitz status that claims that abortion is a “Jewish Value” and therefore Planned Parenthood must be continually force-funded by people who believe that abortion is murder. I can also imagine someone in Germany theoretically claiming that genocide is a “Jewish Value” citing the example of Amalek and urge the government to subsidize it. Same logic. (No, an analogy does not mean A = B. It demonstrates a common logical fallacy.) He further pointed out to me that Planned Parenthood frequently sells aborted baby organs to recoup its costs. And Yanklowitz supports this because he calls for more tax funding of Planned Parenthood. Fascinating. I need not delve further into my disgust here.

I have no problem with Planned Parenthood, provided it is privately funded and does not intentionally kill human fetuses that could be saved after being evicted from the womb, which is owned by the mother. I am an Evictionist. Evictionists hold that a woman may evict a fetus from her womb at any stage, but may not intentionally murder the fetus if it can be saved and taken care of by someone else. Late term abortions, therefore, are murder, legally and morally. Therefore, and I am not recommending this by any means and would never engage in it myself, anyone who stabs a late term abortion doctor at a Late Term Abortion Pride Parade of doctors who intentionally kill viable human babies when they could save them and parade that around, is not morally guilty of murder.

Full circle. Good Shabbos.

With all the gay marriage obsession it’s a wonder I’m still a religious Jew

Self-defined religious that is. People can call me whatever they want, but I still believe the Torah was given at Sinai, in some form at least, by God, that Moshe (Moses) existed, and that this was a historical event.

In any case, the longer I remain a remain a libertarian, the farther my former frum(ish) persona is left in the distance. The less I can take Rabbinic figures seriously because they’re focused on such nonsense. I’ve had this conversation with my wife many times. I can’t take Divrei Torah or Halacha Shiurim seriously anymore. They all seem like a joke to me. Here we are pining over some detail and trying to extract some intellectual opium over it by coming with whatever Svarah, and meanwhile the biggest global theft in the history of the world is happening under our noses and all the religious leaders coming up with the Svarahs have no idea that it’s even happening.

My feed is full of gay marriage comments. Gay marriage. Gay people reading this should rejoice in my next statement: Gay marriage does not matter, in the scheme of things. It’s nice that gay people can now inherit or visit their sick spouses or whatever it is they want to do. It’s a tiny injustice that is now undone. But it’s the government giving gay people a crutch after breaking their legs. Thank you. Whatever. I suppose if I were gay it would matter more to me on a personal level.

Meanwhile, humanity is being slowly led like sheep into the financial gas chambers and nobody realizes it. If you think what’s happening in Greece is intense, imagine it happening globally.

I remember a shiur I once had in college on Emunos Ve’Deos by the RaSag. Sa’adya began his work by saying something like, “If we all stole from one another, nothing would be left.”

That is essentially what we are all doing. We are borrowing from the future to consume in the present (for this is debt) and it’s going to end. It is very hard to take religious figures seriously when they are focused on such issues as the sexual acts between consenting adults.

It’s the equivalent of religious pornography. Watching porn is fine. It’s just stupid, and in the long term harmful, and if you really get into it, self-destructive.

Religious leaders need to come to terms with the correct position. That is, if God says he’s going to kill you for consensual homosexuality, then let Him do it, and leave us Rabbis alone about it. We’re not interested in religious pornography. We should all really be concerned about the fact that everyone is stealing from everyone else, and we’re about to run out of pie.

 

The Tormented Conscience of a Libertarian

It’s been a very hard last few days. I’ve been attacked and supported. Some attacks were stupid. Some were more sensible and really made me think. Some have been from people very close to me that I rejected out of hand, because I don’t agree at all with their positions. Some attacks have been respectful, from past teachers who I really do respect myself, who have challenged me for my tone, but in the end I still think I am right in how I handled this. Some have attacked my social skills, which are and always have been my weakest point. Those attacks really hurt, for a short while, but I’m over it now. I am who I am. And I always will be who I am.

The support has been equally uplifting.I’m thankful to everyone who has lent a hand while I go out, rabid almost, yelling at an organ donor. I write that now even cringing at myself. But I still maintain I did the right thing. I’ve struggled with whether my method of spreading liberty is the right way or not. I haven’t eaten as much as I usually do, because I’ve been on fire for three days. Everyone who has contacted me expressing support, thank you. It really helps. Every word.

My Rebbe in libertarianism, the real current Gadol Hador, more than any Rabbi alive, Dr. Walter Block, has given me strength and continues to give me strength. He is more my teacher than any Rabbi ever was or probably ever will be. May Walter live till 120 and teach forever. And that’s not just a throwaway blessing. I really want him to live that long, and longer. Walter is one of the only a handful of academics who have not succumbed to State Avoda Zara (idol worship).

I started thinking. I’m not the only libertarian that expresses hot anger. We are often grouped together as wacko crazy emotionally unstable lunatics. Why is that?

Because our premise is so simple and we can’t understand why people don’t see it. There’s no pilpul to it. There’s nothing complicated about it. It’s simply that nobody has the right to inflict force on any innocent person. We take that to its logical conclusion. That’s it. There’s nothing else to it. But everyone always disagrees. Innocent people need to be violated for the public good. If you don’t believe in exceptions to no violence against innocents, you’re insane.

What happens is the academics come in, those that form our cultural opinions, and they confuse the hell out of us. They write these longwinded arguments that are self-righteous and incomprehensible. They use big words designed to make you feel stupid. They dodge logic, they squeeze out of black holes and come around and trap you, but nothing they say makes any sense. My father-in-law likes to say, they “Baffle you with Bullshit.” And that’s all they do. Even most of the halacha preachers. Jewish academia. Not all. Most.

I presented this logic to one dissenter:

A) You support a rich person selling a kidney at a discount to a poor person, say $100. Chessed. Lovingkindness.

B) You support a poor person donating to a rich person for free as an act of lovingkindness as well.

C) You are against a poor person selling to the same rich person for $500, saying that is taking advantage.

Ergo, you are against poor people gaining $500. If you were against poor people giving to rich people on principle because you don’t like the idea of the rich feeding off the body parts of the poor, you would not allow them to even donate. But you do. You even think the poor donating to rich is great, wonderful. But not selling. God forbid poor people should get money. So therefore you must hate poor people and don’t want them to have money.

Now, I KNOW the guy doesn’t “hate” poor people. Those who justify their rejection of a free market in organs don’t actually hate poor people emotionally, in their conscious minds at least. But in practice, they do hate them, because they do not even consider them people enough to be able to make their own decisions. They are merely tools of public policy, dictated by People On High Horses (always politicians aided by academics) with complicated ideas that make no sense, concocted in the laboratory of their minds that was constructed through years of State education.

These “Policy Makers” the Academics, they are up there on their high horses dictating what they think about “public policy” in their academic heads, when they probably don’t know a single destitute poor person desperate for money, or a single person desperate for a kidney.

You know how this guy got out of that logical trap? He sent me a 5 paragraph essay about differential equations. I had absolutely no clue what the hell he was talking about. Nobody else did either I bet. But I’m sure they thought he was a genius. It was all used to justify why poor people should not be allowed to decide for themselves, as if they were animals in the lab of his magnificent public policy academy.

And that’s what drives me mad. The pilpul. The insanity. Am I crazy? Am I the only one who sees it? What the hell is going on?

Two people. They’re going to die. One needs money. The other needs an organ. They want to trade. YOU go tell them to die. YOU do it personally. Can you? No. So you dodge the question. You say it’s “systemic”. You say “taking advantage”. You say “public policy.” NO. Tell me. Do you let them trade, or do you make them die? Tell me. They won’t answer. It’s public policy. Dodge dodge dodge. My God it can drive you mad.

But would you, personally, if you needed a kidney, would you buy one on the black market? Would you rather there be a free market if you needed one? Would you rather die? No answer. “I’m a human being and I’d rip someone’s heart out to survive. What does that prove?” Well then. What can I say.

Every Statist wants to dictate “public policy” while he has two healthy kidneys. Nobody wants that public policy applied to them when they need that kidney. Hypocrisy. I can’t stand it. We, libertarians, can’t stand it. Is everyone crazy? Or is injustice the way the world is supposed to be? Maybe we’re crazy for demanding justice. Maybe the world is supposed to be insane and we just don’t fit in.

Libertarians come back to one thing, all the time. Non aggression. That’s all we want. That’s ALL we want. And then the academics answer us with differential equations as to why we must aggress and we’re wrong. And for a second we all think we’re stupid and we should reprogram ourselves with whatever calculus the other people are doing in their heads to prevent poor people from selling organs to rich people. Because it’s taking advantage. But donating isn’t. Huh?

And then, after all that self doubt (it lasts about 2 minutes), we libertarians come back to our senses. We are NOT crazy. Everyone else is. And we are not alone. Thanks to Godsends like Ron Paul, we are growing in numbers. We will not be stamped out. We will scream justice until we die and God takes back our souls. Nothing will stop us. We will win. Despite all the insanity and academia and differential equations.

Freedom must rule. Non aggression must be king. Otherwise there is no point to this world. There is no point to living. Humans are above animals because we can trade. All humans are equal in the fact that all innocent human beings must not be forced to do, or not do, things against their will. Nobody must be forced not to exchange a kidney for $100. Everyone decides for himself. Because everyone is equal in that sense.

Humans are the only creatures on the planet that can mutually benefit through trade. That’s what an economy is, literally. Animals only take what they find and survive. We humans trade and grow. If you advocate stopping that, you are advocating shutting down the human spirit.

And we libertarians, tormented for two minutes of self-doubt from the establishment’s differential equations, we will not let you. We are the human spirit. The FULL human spirit. And you cannot stomp us out.