David Boaz remembers Andrea Millen Rich

RIP Andrea Rich | Cato @ Liberty - David Boaz:

August 1, 2018 - "I am saddened to report that my dear friend Andrea Millen Rich died this morning at her home in Philadelphia at the age of 79 after a 19-year battle with lung cancer....For more than 40 years Andrea was at the center of the libertarian movement, a mentor, counselor, friend, supporter, facilitator, networker, and gracious hostess....

"She was the first chair of the New York Libertarian Party in 1973-74. The vice chair was Howard S. Rich, whom she soon married. From 1974 to 1977 she was vice chair of the national Libertarian Party, and in 1980 she played a key role in developing television advertising for the campaign of Ed Clark, the Libertarian presidential nominee.

"From 1982 to 2005 she was the president of Laissez-Faire Books, which billed itself as 'the world’s largest collection of books on liberty.' It had a retail location on Mercer Street in Greenwich Village.... But in those pre-Amazon days, it was far better known for its monthly catalog that reached libertarians around the world. Through its Fox & Wilkes publishing imprint it brought many classic libertarian books back into print.....

"Andrea often negotiated with publishers to make books more affordable, and some books only found publishers because Laissez-Faire could guarantee an audience beyond the small academic market.

"Through her work with Laissez-Faire she became friendly with leading libertarian writers including Milton and Rose Friedman, Robert Nozick, Thomas Sowell, Nathaniel Branden, Thomas Szasz, Charles Murray, Richard Epstein, David Kelley, and Margit von Mises, widow of economist Ludwig von Mises.

"As president of the Center for Independent Thought [CIT], the parent organization of Laissez-Faire Books, she also launched and managed the Thomas S. Szasz Award for Outstanding Contributions to the Cause of Civil Liberties and the Roy A. Childs Fund for Independent Scholars.

"CIT’s biggest project was Stossel in the Classroom, which repackaged ABC News and Fox Business videos on economics and public policy by John Stossel for classroom use. The videos have been viewed by tens of millions of high school students – according to Stossel, reaching more people than ABC News and Fox News."

Read more: https://www.cato.org/blog/rip-andrea-rich
'via Blog this'

Charles Murray attacked by mob at Middlebury

Another campus, another speaker, another riot - World Net Daily:

March 3, 2017 - "Hundreds of students rioted at Middlebury College in Vermont this week, preventing a respected libertarian scholar from speaking and leaving one female professor in a neck brace.

"Charles Murray was invited by the American Enterprise Institute Club on campus to discuss his book, Coming Apart, which chronicles the struggles facing the white working class in the United States. However, a mob first protested and later assaulted both Murray and Professor Allison Stanger.

"More than 450 alumni at the college released a statement before the event declaring Murray’s invitation to speak was 'unacceptable and unethical' and 'directly endangers members of the community.... We hope many of you dissent, and we hope you make that dissent known to whosoever you see fit,' the statement concluded.

"The result was both verbal and physical abuse. Protesters turned their backs on Murray and chanted, preventing him from delivering his scheduled address. As an alternative, Murray was led to a different location where he was recorded on a closed-circuit telecast being interviewed by Stanger. However, even the recording was interrupted as students slammed chairs, screamed and pulled fire alarms, occasionally shutting down the building’s power.

"Masked demonstrators then physically attacked both Murray and Stanger as they tried to move to a college administrator’s car. Stanger’s hair was pulled by one of the attackers, twisting her neck and inflicting an injury which required hospital treatment and the use of a neck brace. Once Stanger and Murray made it to the vehicle, demonstrators climbed on the hood, slammed on windows, and ripped a stop sign from the ground and used it to prevent the car from moving.

"Even after security cleared a path, Murray’s ordeal was not over. He was later chased from a nearby restaurant when management was warned demonstrators had located him."

Read more: http://www.wnd.com/files/2017/03/Middlebury_riot_charles_murray.jpg
'via Blog this'

John Robson: Why I’m voting Libertarian

John Robson: Why I’m voting Libertarian | National Post: 

August 27, 2015 - "So how am I going to vote? The short answer is, I will cast a ballot that doesn’t make me feel unclean. The medium answer is, the Libertarian party has solved my personal problem by finally finding a sacrificial candidate in my riding. The long answer is the short one: I won’t cast an unclean vote, and I hope people in other ridings follow the same advice....

"I have long described myself as libertarian on policy and conservative in metaphysics.

"I’m metaphysically conservative because I believe man is born to trouble as the sparks fly upward and there is no remedy for the human condition on this side of the grave. So those libertarians who think dramatically reducing government will usher in a new and radiant form of human existence strike me as the mirror image of socialists who think dramatically expanding it will do the same.

"I also have significant differences with many libertarians on national security. Mind you, they couldn’t possibly run defence spending down further than Prime Minister Stephen Harper has. But I’m libertarian on most policy issues because conservatives who consider governments (both provincial and federal) that are as bloated and arrogant as ours to be compatible with anything they hold dear are out of their minds. And if they know, and don’t want to act, they’re in even worse condition."

"Those who espouse a conservatism of prudence too often and too easily sink into timid immobility, even smug complacency, in the face of looming disaster. Now is never a good time, and then never comes. But is it genuine prudence to set an aging population on a collision course with Soviet-style health care? Starve defence in an increasingly disorderly world, while aspiring to a major global role? Praise families in every other press release while watching that institution disintegrate?

"If not, then no mainstream party is prudent and anyone who considers themselves remotely conservative should be demanding that we dramatically shrink the welfare state. Even Liberals like Louis St. Laurent or Wilfrid Laurier would regard modern Canadian governments as a shocking affront to human dignity, as well as a menace to prosperity.

"The problem, Charles Murray argues in his book, In Pursuit: Of Happiness and Good Government, isn’t just that governments cannot deliver the free lunches they promised; it’s that free lunches don’t nourish. We are not cattle to be fed, watered and pastured. We must strive. That’s why G.K. Chesterton said self-government must mean ordinary people 'are to be, within reasonable human limits, masters of their own lives.' Can you find any party or candidate whose platform now embodies this understanding?

"It need not be libertarian. Obviously I think it should. But I grant that plenty of people of good will and sound mind are liberals or socialists because they genuinely believe the right sort of government intervention does, or can, help people regain control over their own lives and immediate circumstances. The thing is, to achieve that goal, the party or candidate you support must at the very least not be part of a vast, cynical, intellectually crooked partisan machine."

Read more: http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/john-robson-why-im-voting-libertarian
'via Blog this'

Murray: The problem is progressives, not liberals

Charles Murray: The Trouble Isn't Liberals. It's Progressives. - Wall Street Journal:

June 30, 2014 - "A few weeks ago, I was thrown into a situation where I shared drinks and dinner with two men who have held high positions in Democratic administrations. Both men are lifelong liberals. There's nothing 'moderate' about their liberalism. But as the pleasant evening wore on (we knew that there was no point in trying to change anyone's opinion on anything), I was struck by how little their politics have to do with other elements of the left.

"Their liberalism has nothing in common with the political mind-set that wants right-of-center speakers kept off college campuses, rationalizes the forced resignation of a CEO who opposes gay marriage, or thinks George F. Will should be fired for writing a column disagreeable to that mind-set. It has nothing to do with executive orders unilaterally disregarding large chunks of legislation signed into law or with using the IRS as a political weapon. My companions are on a different political plane from those on the left with that outlook — the progressive mind-set....

"[T]he progressive movement at the turn of the 20th century had roots in German philosophy (Hegel and Nietzsche were big favorites) and German public administration (Woodrow Wilson's open reverence for Bismarck was typical among progressives). To simplify, progressive intellectuals were passionate advocates of rule by disinterested experts led by a strong unifying leader. They were in favor of using the state to mold social institutions in the interests of the collective. They thought that individualism and the Constitution were both outmoded....

"It is that core philosophy extolling the urge to mold society that still animates progressives today — a mind-set that produces the shutdown of debate and growing intolerance that we are witnessing in today's America. Such thinking on the left also is behind the rationales for indulging President Obama in his anti-Constitutional use of executive power. If you want substantiation for what I'm saying, read Jonah Goldberg's 2008 book Liberal Fascism, an erudite and closely argued exposition of American progressivism and its subsequent effects on liberalism. The title is all too accurate."

Read more: http://online.wsj.com/articles/charles-murray-the-trouble-isnt-liberals-its-progressives-1404170419
'via Blog this'

Why Charles Murray supports guaranteed income

Libertarian Charles Murray: The welfare state has denuded our civic culture | Making Sen$e | PBS NewsHour:

April 10, 2010 - "Switzerland is considering a ballot referendum on an unconditional income of 30,000 Francs for all Swiss citizens.... But ... guaranteed basic income ... has plenty of American proponents.... Perhaps most outspoken among them is libertarian economist Charles Murray, who argues that a guaranteed income administered by the government would take the government out of people’s lives, and consequently, restore the fabric of American culture.... The following transcript of Paul Solman’s extended conversation with Murray about the guaranteed income has been edited and condensed for length and clarity....

Paul Solman: What’s the case for a minimum income?
Charles Murray: From a libertarian’s point of view, we’re going to be spending a lot of money on income transfers, no matter what.
Paul Solman: Why?
Charles Murray: The society is too rich to stand aside and say, “We aren’t going to do anything for people in need.” I understand that; I accept that; I sympathize with it.
    "What I want is a grand compromise between the left and the right. We on the right say, 'We will give you huge government, in terms of the amount of money we spend. You give us small government, in terms of the ability of government to mess around with people’s lives.'
    "So you have a system whereby every month, a check goes into an electronic bank account for everybody over the age of 21, which they can use as they see fit. They can get together with other people and then combine their resources. But they live their own lives. We put their lives back in their hands"

Read more: http://www.pbs.org/newshour/making-sense/libertarian-charles-murray-the-welfare-state-has-denuded-our-civic-culture/
'via Blog this'

Guaranteed Income as a Replacement for the Welfare State, by Charles Murray

The libertarian populist agenda

The Libertarian Populist Agenda | RealClearPolitics - Ben Domenech:

June 5, 2013 - "For all this talk of late regarding conservative reform, the most successful conservative reform project of the post-Reagan era was not from the top down, but the bottom up. The Tea Party joined those who favored limited government together regardless of their priorities, and they were successful in a not insignificant part because they were running with the tides of American sentiment as opposed to against them – with a rising skepticism for institutions, particularly those of great size.

"They wanted to reform the party, but they did not want the party to just be satisfied with a reform message. Where the traditional trends of Thomas Dewey tend Republicanism toward fixing the institutions of government and society, this new strand had more in common with Charles Murray, whose What It Means to Be a Libertarian makes the case not for fixing the departments of Commerce, Agriculture, Energy, and Housing and Urban Development, but for eliminating them and replacing them with, and I quote, 'Nothing.'"

Read more: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2013/06/05/the_libertarian_populist_agenda_118694.html
'via Blog this'