Compulsory Education

Everyone loves learning. The thing is that not everyone likes studying and what’s even more frustrating is to be told how we should study, why we should study etc. Making education available to everyone is benevolent but making education compulsory for everyone is something that we are so used to that we do not see the blatant problem with it – the deprivation of freedom that prevents the flourishing of precisely those who have the most potential in society; children.

The Five Institutions of the Market Economy

Let us see what the basic institutions of the market economy are. We may subdivide them for convenience of discussion into (1) private property, (2) free markets, (3) competition, (4) division and combination of labor, and (5) social cooperation. As we shall see, these are not separate institutions. They are mutually dependent: each implies the other, and makes it possible.

Seize or Build the Means of Production?

You often hear left anarchists (anarcho-communists, anarcho-syndicalists, etc.) promoting the idea of “seizing the means of production” and smashing corporate hierarchy, and whatnot (regular communists and syndicalists, too, of course). But aside from corporate hierarchy that persists as the result of political privilege, why should anyone seize the means of production rather than building the means of production for themselves?

Who Benefits From Upper Class Wealth?

Many a social democrat and left anarchist decry the existence of wealth inequality, considering it evidence that a crime somewhere, some time has been committed, and that justice must be made through violent confiscatory and re-distributive government programs. To them such is perfectly just because it is the righting of a wrong. The state is a tool that may used in this way, just as for small government libertarians it may be used in self-defense. This is a type of self-defense by the have-nots against the haves. It make me wonder, however, just how beneficial wealth is to the haves, and even to the have-notes? Let us count the ways.

Facts

Nobody asked but … If “might” makes “rights,” then they are “privileges” not “rights.”  This raises the problem that we have no concrete definition of “rights” in a statist context.  I really like Skyler’s idea that might includes reason, which has as much power to create structure as does coercion. I guess I don’t really adhere…