And Out of the Mailbag Comes Libertarianism!

Let’s have some fun with another Rude reader’s excellent commentary. [The Rude Awakening] December 13, 2022 [WEBSITE]( | [UNSUBSCRIBE]( And Out of the Mailbag Comes Libertarianism! - Should we be libertarians or Libertarians? - What does the Average Joe want? - What’s a CEO’s real job, and how does that relate to libertarianism? [Do you own gold?]( [Somebody recently decided to buy a LOT of gold.]( And I think I know why... It's all about a meeting that's scheduled for December 14. If you own gold (even just a few ounces of it), you've got to see what could be happening. The big announcement just might be days away. [Click here now.]( [Click Here To Learn More]( [Sean Ring] SEAN RING HO! HO! HO! It’s snowing in Asti on this frigid Tuesday morning. I hope you’re staying toasty and have your warm cup of joe in your hand. Damon C wrote an excellent commentary and sent it to the mailbag; I just had to answer. He wrote on a subject close to my heart. I don’t often get to articulate in print what I genuinely think. I’ll try to remedy this in the same fashion as [yesterday’s](. Here’s Damon’s piece: As a libertarian (no longer capital “L,” let my membership lapse), I am familiar with Austrian and other schools of thought, but my experience IRL as a member, executive, candidate, etc., has taught me two things that make a Hoppean society nigh impossible: - The “Average Joe” has neither the education nor inclination to do the work necessary; they have been taught that “the government will take of that,” whether road construction or consumer protection. - Big businesses and politicians/bureaucrats cannot be trusted to play within the rules or accept a level playing field; CEOs are taught their only moral imperative is to maximize profits (the “by any means” is unspoken but implicit in everything), while politicians – now openly for sale in the dark money market – will change morals, promises and excuses like rental cars just to remain in power. A world such as Hoppe envisions requires a firm, efficient but fair judicial system, not the convoluted, expensive, and politicized one we have. It requires citizens to take responsibility for their actions and outcomes and to be educated and engaged. Last but not least, it requires those who succeed to donate time and money to charity willingly and for civic betterment or accept the grim realities of a truly Darwinian world, including the inevitable bloody uprisings by those who have nothing to lose. Sorry for the gloomy outlook, but I am 70 years old and no longer smoke the Hopium. Damon C This is brilliant. Damon, I wrote a funny quote the other day from one of my besties: “A pessimist is an optimist with better information.” You’ve got valuable information. Let me go through your points in turn. Libertarianism With a Capital “L” First, libertarianism should only be spelled with a capital letter when the word begins a sentence. Libertarianism is freedom and liberty as a way of thinking. The Libertarian Party - God help us - has disgraced itself from Day One. I have no part in it and would have no part in it. In fact, creating a political party is the antithesis of what libertarians believe. What Does the Average Joe Want? This depends on who you define as the Average Joe. If Average Joe is like John Ring, Philosopher-Truck Driver, then Average Joe is a “Leave Me the F*ck Alone” libertarian. Of course, being John’s son, I’ve inherited that mindset. Most entrepreneurs, small business owners, and apolitical citizens are this type of libertarian. But if you define Average Joe as the middle-class cubicle jockey, soccer mom, or [those trying to reach Island 120]( then yes, they think the government should do everything for them. Click on that link to see Bill Whittle define his Island 120 theory. It’s simple and brilliant. Here’s my little not-so-secret: I don’t care about the second bunch all that much. I’m not trying to make society in my own image. That’s what Utopian lunatics like Klaus Schwab and his mentor, Henry Kissinger, try to do. I care about The Remnant. And specifically, [The](. As I wrote in that previous piece: According to [Albert Jay] Nock, The Remnant is a small minority who understood what was going on and would become influential only after the current dangerous course had become obviously untenable. The Remnant understands that situation might not occur until far into the future. Quite frankly, I’m not sure the masses will understand this mess even far into the future, if ever. But to paraphrase Rick Blaine in Casablanca, the problems of the masses are not in my department. You’re in my department. I’m concentrating only on you, a member of the Rude Remnant. Let’s take care of our own garden and leave the others to their own devices. [Rickards: “Dollar doomsday plot” revealed]( Jim Rickards made some spectacular financial predictions in the past… - In 2016, Jim predicted Brexit would pass. He was right. - That same year, Jim predicted that Donald Trump would win the U.S. Presidential election. Jim was right again! - And in 2019, Jim didn’t just correctly predict a pandemic — he also predicted exactly how the government would respond! Now Jim is forecasting a “dollar doomsday plot” you won’t believe. [Go here now to see](. [Click Here To Learn More]( What’s a CEO’s Job? Here is where we disagree. And this is where we need to get in the weeds a bit. I firmly believe that [Milton Friedman was and remains correct]( That is why, in my book “Capitalism and Freedom,” I have called [social responsibility] a “fundamentally subversive doctrine” in a free society, and have said that in such a society, “there is one and only one social responsibility of business—to use its resources and engage in activities designed to increase its profits so long as it stays within the rules of the game, which is to say, engages in open and free competition without deception fraud.” Why? Earlier, in that seminal piece, he wrote: What does it mean to say that the corporate executive has a “social responsibility” in his capacity as a businessman? If this statement is not pure rhetoric, it must mean that he is to act in some way that is not in the interest of his employers. For example, that he is to refrain from increasing the price of the product in order to contribute to the social objective of preventing inflation, even though a price increase would be in the best interests of the corporation. Or that he is to make expenditures on reducing pollution beyond the amount that is in the best interests of the corporation or that is required by law in order to contribute to the social objective of improving the environment. Or that, at the expense of corporate profits, he is to hire “hard core” unemployed instead of better qualified available workmen to contribute to the social objective of reducing poverty. I’d say the real problem is that executives have been taught to “maximize shareholder value” rather than maximize profit. Assuming it’s obtained within the game's rules, profit is the scoreboard by which executives know how they please their customers. There are all sorts of shenanigans a company can engage in to roof its stock price without making a fair profit. Fudging accounting methods, stock buybacks, and government subsidies come to mind. Our Upside-Down Judicial System The Supreme Court mutated from the highest appellate court to a nine-person unelected judiciary. But before we even get to them, let’s face it: the more expensive your lawyer is, the likelier you’ll win your case. It’s a corrupt system, far from the superior method of a private law society. From [Hoppe]( himself: In light of the multiple errors of classical liberalism, then, how is law and order vis-à-vis actual and potential lawbreakers maintained? The solution lies in a private law society — a society where every individual and institution is subject to one and the same set of laws! No public law granting privileges to specific persons or functions (and no public property) exists in this society. There is only private law (and private property), equally applicable to each and every one. No one is permitted to acquire property by any other means than through original appropriation, production, or voluntary exchange; and no one possesses the privilege to tax and expropriate. Moreover, no one in a private law society is permitted to prohibit anyone else from using his property in order to enter any line of production and compete against whomever he pleases. What chances of this happening? It’s a non-zero number awfully close to zero. The Kindness of Others Again, I think there’s much charity in this world if one knows where to look. My favorite examples of this are [Khan Academy]( [Startup School]( and YouTube. Here are all Jordan Peterson’s [Maps of Meaning lectures]( from the University of Toronto. All of them are free of charge. You can learn anything at any time from the best of the best. Wrap Up Damon, thanks so much for the stimulating mail. And I don’t blame you for not smoking the hopium. Perhaps we should start smoking the Hoppeum! And remember, if you still want Hoppe’s condensed thoughts, [you can get them here](. Have a great day ahead! All the best, [Sean Ring] Sean Ring Editor, Rude Awakening [Paradigm]( ☰ ⊗ [ARCHIVE]( [ABOUT]( [Contact Us]( © 2022 Paradigm Press, LLC. 808 Saint Paul Street, Baltimore MD 21202. By submitting your email address, you consent to Paradigm Press, LLC. delivering daily email issues and advertisements. To end your Rude Awakening e-mail subscription and associated external offers sent from Rude Awakening, feel free to [click here.]( Please note: the mailbox associated with this email address is not monitored, so do not reply to this message. We welcome comments or suggestions at feedback@rudeawakening.info. This address is for feedback only. For questions about your account or to speak with customer service, [contact us here]( or call (844)-731-0984. Although our employees may answer your general customer service questions, they are not licensed under securities laws to address your particular investment situation. No communication by our employees to you should be deemed as personalized financial advice. We allow the editors of our publications to recommend securities that they own themselves. However, our policy prohibits editors from exiting a personal trade while the recommendation to subscribers is open. In no circumstance may an editor sell a security before subscribers have a fair opportunity to exit. The length of time an editor must wait after subscribers have been advised to exit a play depends on the type of publication. All other employees and agents must wait 24 hours after on-line publication or 72 hours after the mailing of a printed-only publication prior to following an initial recommendation. Any investments recommended in this letter should be made only after consulting with your investment advisor and only after reviewing the prospectus or financial statements of the company. Rude Awakening is committed to protecting and respecting your privacy. We do not rent or share your email address. Please read our [Privacy Statement.]( If you are having trouble receiving your Rude Awakening subscription, you can ensure its arrival in your mailbox by [whitelisting Rude Awakening.](