RichmondLiberty.org

I just read your article on school board elections-First I was very
opposed in this election-not unopposed. Second i was talking about
making the system do something for poeple. A point you might have
caught had you read everything that I
said as opposed to picking out one Sentence to make your point. I'm
not sure that your journallism is any better than the Times Dispatch.

Thank you for your response, I have corrected the typo where I said you were unopposed. For everyone's information, candidate Art Burton of 6th District ran against Chandra Smith who won by a majority of about 350 votes. In response to my quoting you out of context, this was the longest article I have yet posted and I attempted to maximize the amount of direct quotes and minimize my responses so the candidates' words could speak for themselves.
I did read your entire profile and there was lots of material I wanted to use, like "we know the results of having undereducated people who are hopeless and in despair.".* As a student I was penalized for being smarter than the other kids and as a result I have fewer points in the job market today than many who are less educated than me, so who is undereducated? Perhaps you should have said "we know the results of anyone who opposes the school system who are hopeless and in despair".
I believe from your profile that you are probably honest, hard-working and well-intentioned in your fight against the industrialists and city planners. I don't think anyone disagrees that poverty and run-down facilities are a problem. Speaking as a patron of a different institution however I hope you will understand that you definitely belong on my blacklist with your fellow academicians, and the words in your profile definitely show that affinity in force. The biggest problem with public schools is that they are "perceived" as education when they are actually not, so the perception of the school system you described is completely accurate in my opinion and the people have said so. Perception is going to be hard for your institution to maintain in the 21st Century, because as homeschooling grows public schools will discover they are only one competitor among many, and do not have the monopoly on education that obligates any child to attend or passes the responsibility of poverty and other civic issues into your hands.
For our readers, a majority of the candidates I rated against were elected to office. The one victor among those I praised was Keith West of 7th District who won by 15 votes. (Although I spoke well of incumbent Betsy Carr she had both positive and negative aspects to her platform from a Libertarian viewpoint.) It should be noted that several of the candidates I rated poorly were unopposed, and several of the challengers ran against each other. Candidate Doug Goodwein of 8th District whom I mentioned favorably also wrote to us with his opinions. For full election results go to http://originmedia.gatewayva.com/rtd/multimedia/Election06/Results/.

*http://www.richmond.com/election/output.aspx?Article_ID=4392816&Vertical_ID=127&tier=1&position=2

If you have opinions you'd like to add to this thread please send them to henrico@richmondliberty.org and they will be posted!

Posted by Robert Russo at November 15, 2006 | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

by Robert Russo

            We all use the internet as a vehicle for promoting or researching Libertarianism, but to date I have never seen our way of life (or any social guidelines for that matter) applied toward the online community itself.  Millions of users are connected every second of the day and yet there is no defense of their liberties against totalitarianism.  I am not speaking of censorship of the material we see online, for that was an issue of people first discovering this realm to research or check email that doesn’t require them to interact with other online citizens.  I mean the time one spends in social situations (chat rooms, message boards, private messaging) in the company of fellow users.  This realm is one of those social voids in our society which is constantly used but never acknowledged.  When one gets up from the desk it ceases to be.  I hear continuously the opinion of the part-time user who connects once a day to do research or send his email, saying that what happens online is not to be taken seriously. For some time I have wanted to write the opposite, the deterioration of the internet from the perspective of a fulltime user, for a general audience.

A decade ago when many of us logged in for the first time, competing ISP's offered a complete online experience to those who had never had one before. Chat rooms, message forums, downloads, one didn't even have to use the Web to enjoy themselves. AOL was at the head of this small pack. Then when Netscape and Internet Explorer debuted, they became AOL's biggest competitors not by offering similar services, but advertising lower rates and better connectivity without mentioning they had nothing AOL has, just a web browser with email. In most areas of business a competitor does not succeed by targeting people who don't want the full product or don't know it exists. But AOL is still so addictive it has become a monopoly (not necessarily of its own accord), offering AIM and connection services to non-members because their own ISP's won't provide it. It has no peers as an online business provider.

In the early days of chatting there was no limit to how many people could fit in a room. It was like the Wild West where the defense of oneself and others against jerks and predators was in one's own hands. Users could say what they pleased and download software to punt people offline they didn't like (much like the Second Amendment allows us to protect ourselves in the real world). This gave patrons of a forum a degree of control over staying on topic and challenging the detractor. (In a world of only words, character and determination have value.) Now on AOL there are no visible moderators, no tolerance for any language that could be considered hurtful, and the patrons of a room are at the mercy of whoever comes in next. Conversation is an eavesdropped farce where the last person standing is the one who rats on everyone else.

Most non-AOL chatters use webchat, a far more complex program. Each website is a private enterprise so there is no way to judge them all. In one of the most successful long-standing webchats, I have observed this same "code of civility" maintained by a mafia-like staff of moderators 24/7. Honest bickering and defense of one's neighbor are forbidden, instead the chatters demand a setting that is free of issues or dissent at any cost. The result is a favored clique of chatters who can have anyone of their choosing removed because they are trusted, even when they are shouting obscenities. A host enters, identifies the disruption (the minority) and boots them. In this way the hosts are puppets and don't abide by the rules that come with being a moderator (a moderator does not take sides, a moderator does not use their authority to enforce their personal opinion). If there is griping about the website or its staff the participants in this discussion lose their accounts. This is a preview of how our society in the real world might someday be.

People complain ad nauseum but the response from the webmaster or ISP is always the same, "it's just chat". The national media now respects bloggers, and yet people refuse to acknowledge there is a society here and it has the same problems and solutions of a society. I am not advocating a lifestyle where people sit in front of a screen all day as the only source of their comradery and attention, but if they are going to be online they should be able to do so without the headaches and helplessness of having no rights. The answer is not dictatorship or gang-warfare, it is the promotion of a better online citizen. To do this one must take their time and their words seriously, even on the computer, as they would in any aspect of their life where attention is needed to work and play unhindered.

Question of the Week: Were your rights of free speech online ever denied or taken down? If so do you believe this problem is better addressed online or offline? Please send your experiences to henrico@richmondliberty.org.

If you have topics of interest to Libertarians please let us know. We welcome your input!

Posted by Robert Russo at November 15, 2006 | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

The next Henrico county LP meeting will be Wednesday, Nov 15 th at the Dumbarton Library (6800 Staples Mill Rd) from 6:30 PM to 8:30 PM. LPHC Members are welcome to observe the meeting.

Posted by Leonard Harris at November 13, 2006 | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

by Robert Russo

This weekend’s domestic headlines were dominated by the scandal of a top evangelist who resigned over sex and drugs. With such a regularity of church-related indignities these days one must wonder why people allow an institution where a person has influence over the most core lifestyle of countless others, then admits he is "a deceiver and a liar" once he is caught expecting forgiveness.* It seems no different from mainstream politics except that public office doesn’t normally come with redemption.
It is not a question of what offenses occurred because job approval and standards are a part of everyday life, without unnecessary widespread social repercussions. Human shortcomings and disagreements are universal. It is the fact that this individual was placed in such an influential situation that is the problem. God can be trusted, individuals can be trusted, but an institution cannot be trusted because the boardroom and a long tier of safeguards prevent the decisions, insight or control of one person. It acts with its own mind. It can’t be reasoned with and it can’t be stopped by any one voter.
This condemnation of the individual, viewing him as the source of corruption in a spirit of fairness toward ensuring the common goal stems from our traditional American fear of dictatorship, and a long history of human error being the most newsworthy setbacks to any device or pragmatic goal. To ensure that no individual is a threat to that goal takes from us the rest of our humanity and keeping what was initially one man’s pragmatism from governing itself, uncontrollable. Since all ideas spring from the individual human mind, all modern institutions are merely the evolution of one tycoon’s dream, every science a furthering of one man’s theory. It is almost communist now in its implications, teaching people they have no real say.
In making life easier and more profitable everyone seeks a monopoly, making government the ultimate monopoly. We must evict this delegation and procrastination of our needs, choices and actions. Churchgoers will be better off seeking God directly or through small parishes with no bureaucracy; employees would be more empowered to complete their tasks without someone looking over their shoulder; political groups and even volunteer organizations would be truer to their goals without a national office; and citizens would be better served in totality by local representation, unless that body relinquishes control and serves only as a connection and meeting place to pursue greater causes. If a Democrat or Republican sees no chance of being a major contributor to their party because it has become too big and too cemented in its ways, what good is their being a member?

*http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/11/05/haggard.allegations/index.html

Send your opinions to henrico@richmondliberty.org.
If you have topics of interest to Libertarians please let us know. We welcome your input!

Posted by Robert Russo at November 6, 2006 | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

by Robert Russo

            This election day nineteen candidates will vie for seats on the Richmond School Board, including five competitors for the 5th District seat alone (vacated by Chairman Stephen Johnson last April over possession of marijuana at Richmond airport).*   And yet once again, looking at this myriad of choices most of them seem to be cut from the same political cloth, leading one to wonder if they’ll all be spending election night at a restaurant together rather than separate camps.  Here is a short review of the contenders from the perspective of a Libertarian antiacademic.

            The format for the profiles submitted by each candidate visible on Richmond.com begins with the heading of Family (which is meaningless in gauging a job candidate), then Place of Employment, Educational Background and Civic Involvement (all of questionable relevance).  Twelve of the candidates list where their children are enrolled or will be enrolled (to ensure the age factor does not preclude their enduring loyalty to this institution).  Among their qualifiers two candidates list heredity, three list loyalty to the school system, and four consider being a parent qualification to hold public office.

            Seven of the candidates name poverty as their primary platform.  Now poverty is certainly one of Richmond’s most immediate problems and if one wants to battle it they should either roll up their sleeves and help people directly or run for government office in which neighborhood conditions fall under their jurisdiction, but what does being on the school board have to do with this?  Several attempts to explain this connection are made, the most common being the idea that public schools are a person’s only vehicle to getting a better job and therefore get out of poverty.  This simplistic view is like helping a stranded motorist by telling him to get a better insurance policy.  It assumes that public schools are the only source of knowledge for the workplace, and that jobs are a reliable way to get out of social situations.  If I were on the school board I would not be trying to manipulate society, but pass on education for education’s sake. Others suggest that poverty is merely a crime against the school system by distracting students from program, with words like "When students with issues enroll in school, they bring those problems with them into the classroom, thus taking away much needed instructional time and misuse of talented teachers."** Out of curiosity, what wouldn't be a misuse of teachers?

Candidate Gregory Day of 5th District names truancy as his first platform, writing "Everyone should watch out for children not in school, it is a coordination and responsibility of churches, community organization, police, libraries, area businesses, etc., to be vigilant and to be of service to determine and correct the problems for their not being in school.".** He rounds out his argument with the rather idiotic "I view the solutions to RPS concerns in S-T-E-P-S which means safety, truancy, education, and parental involvement which equals success."** Carol Wolf who runs unopposed in 3rd District believes in "assisting those citizens outside of the school by eliminating one of the possible reasons that a child would be 'legitimately' not in school."*** Hopefully the anticipated homeschooling boom, if not the election itself, will disrupt the plans of a single business trying to recruit the entire city to round up its non-customers. Donald Coleman of 7th District plainly states "Reality stares at us declaring: 'You can't educate a child that is not in school!'"**** We can and we are.

Asking the candidates to identify the biggest problem schools face is like pulling teeth. Three candidates name "perception" as a major concern. Art Burton of 6th District is fighting "the perception that the school system is unfit for our children, that our leadership does not listen to our community and does not care about the hardships of the disadvantaged".***** How about actually making it care about those things and let people judge for themselves? Coleman says flat-out "Community perception can be changed by a positive marketing campaign to tell the story of what is good about RPS. Developing quality slogans and brand identity would be a part of this campaign.".****

Loyalist agendas such as these seem like competition for positions the board itself is appointing, not the variety of approaches and directions the electoral process is supposed to offer. Kim Bridges who is unopposed in 1st District with a background that includes the RPC Attendance Zone Task Force writes "we can leverage community and family involvement to overcome the obstacles to academic success."****** Really, leveraging the community to service the school system. Lisa Dawson who is unopposed in 2nd District when asked what is the most pressing issue replies "we are continuing to determine the appropriate qualitative and quantitative level of ongoing assessments, as well as supporting the programs which make that school so well loved by its stakeholders."******* What does that mean? George Braxton of 4th District cites an interesting problem, "Lack of consistency in the leadership of our school system. This is a problem that plagues many urban school districts. There is often a constant turnover of elected school boards due to the political aspiration of the candidates and the dissatisfaction of the residents. Too often, fledgling politicians and rudderless activists seeking elected office and public notoriety gravitate to a job that should involve minimal politics and activism. This leads to turnover of Superintendents and the constant change of educational strategy in the system.".******** So it is the democratic process itself that is objected to; too impractical. As Dawson puts it, "The bottom line is that we all want the same things and as long as we focus on that we should be able to handle how to get there."******* If this is true why bother having debates?

There do appear to be some exceptions however. The 5th District incumbent Betsy Carr who was appointed, not elected to that seat, admits "Choice of academic and other opportunities are essential for our children. ...Magnet schools for math and science, the arts, leadership development, Montessori learning, and vocational training deserve full consideration. Regardless of where children live, they should have access to the programs that best suite their unique interests and needs."** To the question School board members must not only work with one another and with the superintendent, but also with Richmond City Council and Mayor Wilder. How would you balance all of these relationships? challenger Raymond Gargiulo responds with "I would be guided only by the essential welfare of the students as expressed by their parents and citizens of the Fifth District. These are the issues I would first fight for. Issues that promote the comfort, convenience, and business advantage of mayor, superintendent, city council, and school board; I will fight against."** Keith West of 7th District tackles it succinctly as well with "Balance implies harmony. I'm not sure balancing these relationships is the goal. The school board's first duty is to the students by way of the voters. It needs to be a strong advocate for the children in our schools."****

Ronald Bond of 7th District advises "more patience and a more effective way to teach. Thus, giving the child an opportunity to learn not at a pace, but rather the way he or she may learn best."**** West states a refreshing "These reports outline a failed organization. Any time an organization is failing, the problem rests with the leadership. What needs to be done is not rocket science."**** Alfred Goodwein of 8th District hits the nail squarely with "Good district representation beyond 'hobby representation' where a school board representative supports the aims of education and not the self-serving interest of the school administration."********* ('Hobby representation' is synonymous with 'parental representation' in my view.) West makes a rather startling admission, "I had no choice but to attend public schools. Seven of my school years were spent in inner city schools of poor quality. Having experienced the feeling of injustice at being trapped in under-performing schools, it's not an experience I would wish on anyone."****. One would think this would lead someone to be antiacademic, but every one of these candidates still has one foot in the academic pool. Poor facilities and closing schools top the biggest concerns. Hopefully each voter can derive the glimmers of awareness of the greater educational spectrum that trickle through and not allow the usual monopoly of academicians to hold every seat. For details on all the candidates go to http://www.richmond.com/education/output.aspx?Article_ID=4385941&Vertical_ID=11&tier=3&position=8.
 
*http://www.richmondtimesdispatch.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=RTD%2FMGArticle%2FRTD_BasicArticle&c=MGArticle&cid=1149191426341&path=%21news&s=1045855934842
**http://www.richmond.com/education/output.aspx?Article_ID=4385941&Vertical_ID=11&tier=3&position=8.
***http://www.richmond.com/election/output.aspx?Article_ID=4369718&Vertical_ID=175&tier=2&position=1
****http://www.richmond.com/election/output.aspx?Article_ID=4395934&Vertical_ID=127&tier=1&position=1
*****http://www.richmond.com/election/output.aspx?Article_ID=4392816&Vertical_ID=127&tier=1&position=2
******http://www.richmond.com/election/output.aspx?Article_ID=4350838&Vertical_ID=175&tier=2&position=1
*******http://www.richmond.com/election/output.aspx?Article_ID=4360436&Vertical_ID=175&tier=2&position=1
********http://www.richmond.com/election/output.aspx?Article_ID=4377825&Vertical_ID=175&tier=2&position=1
*********http://www.richmond.com/education/output.aspx?Article_ID=4409527&Vertical_ID=131&tier=1&position=2

Question of the Week: If the Libertarian Party were to run a successful district takeover, what changes in the school system would you like to see? Send your opinions to henrico@richmondliberty.org.

If you have topics of interest to Libertarians please let us know. We welcome your input.
 

Posted by Robert Russo at November 1, 2006 | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

by Robert Russo

Two years from now the nation will have changed again, the situation in Iraq may be different, the political stakes will be different. Will we see a Libertarian front-runner? If the debates and other media are still not open to us, which candidate will claim the vote of liberals? (or conservatives who want to see things changed back to pre-Bush) Everyone wants change, so much that the news agencies are already going hoopla over even the suggestion of who the liberal contenders will be. It will be interesting to look back on this premature mayhem and see if anything became of it.

This week CNN begins its 5-part series "Broken Government" exploring how much of the system is broken "beyond repair" (currently 94% of those polled agree our government is broken).* What president has ever investigated this himself? We libertarians have known this for years because we hold the solutions to what is irreparable (get rid of it).

Last week former Gov. Mark Warner declared he will not run, and now Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois makes headlines for merely considering the possibility on NBC’s "Meet the Press".** Obama owes his brief presence on the national scene to a single speech he made as keynote speaker at the Democratic Convention two years ago, which earned him rave reviews and instant popularity because (in my opinion) he is young, Black and a powerful speaker. For I was watching this speech and it was one of the worst I have ever heard, the reason being that it was a textbook political pacifier, easy to write and guaranteed to please, without a single original statement we have not heard before.

He is greatly admired and I am not saying he isn’t a dynamic and qualified representative or even a liberal (probably more so than most), there is simply nothing he has said that I have heard which suggests he is a liberal. He spoke at length about his family and origins, a qualifier for the approval of conservatives going back thousands of years. He did speak briefly about helping workers arise from low wages, helping people pay for college and fighting racism, all issues that were around when his grandfather and likely great-grandfather were his age. It is true that he was promoting John Kerry and not himself, but he is a maintainer, a custodian like most on the political scene. As he said, "we gather to affirm the greatness of our nation".

This statement sounds like things are going pretty well. I don’t care what a candidate’s family background is, unless I want people to judge me by mine. I don’t want one fighting the same issues my grandparents did, each generation is supposed to have its own advent. The difference between Martin Luther King and speakers today is that he was a revolutionary. If there is no suggestion of change then there is no promise of hope. So Obama brings nothing new to the political arena except himself, and by definition that is not a liberal or neo-conservative.

One could say that an African candidate is naturally a liberal, but race should not be entered in with one's political evaluation. Hillary Clinton appeals to pre-Bush conservatives but it remains to be seen where the nation will stand on having a female president, or becoming president by being the wife of a president. Mark Warner is a liberal businessman, but none of these are the true liberal we want in a president (or conservative depending on your point of view). The nation calls out for a Libertarian without knowing it.

*http://www.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/broken.government/index.html
**http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/10/22/obama.presidency/index.html
***http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A19751-2004Jul27.html

Question of the Week: Do you believe we as libertarians must only vote for members of our own party, or is there something to be gained by engaging in the two-party system and backing a Rep or Dem who has some agreeable qualities? Please send your opinions to henrico@richmondliberty.org.

If you have topics of interest to Libertarians please let us know. We welcome your input.

Posted by Robert Russo at October 24, 2006 | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Libertarians join “Granny Warriors” to Protest against Federal Animal Surveillance Law

Richmond, VA October 19, 2006 - Grassroots activist group Granny Warriors will be holding a protest downtown on Tuesday against the National Animal ID System (“NAIDS”), the controversial set of livestock regulations proposed by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Libertarians from the area will also join in the protest. The event will be held Tuesday, October 24th from 9AM to 4PM at 11th and Broad Street in downtown Richmond, VA.

If enacted, NAIS could require all owners of “livestock” to embed an ID microchip within the bodies of their animals. The requirement would apply to small family farmers, and even to individual owners of animals some would consider pets. Under this regulation, someone who owns an individual horse or chicken could have the same expensive and confusing legal obligations as large farms and ranches.

This year the Granny Warriors have set their sights on NAIS, touring now through nine southern states to protest the USDA proposal. Based out of East Texas, Granny Warriors is an organization of elderly women touring the country in a decked-out RV to campaign for the rights of animal owners. They travel to public venues throughout the country, where they raise awareness about the gradual erosion of animal owners’ rights. The Granny Warriors consider themselves necessary to counter radical activist groups such as PETA who would ban all human possession of pets or livestock. Their activities are fueled--quite literally--by the small donations they receive for gas money to drive around the county. Having now come to Richmond, the Granny Warriors are receiving support from local affiliates of the Libertarian Party.

“This is big-government nannyism at its worse,” says Matt Martin, Vice-Chair of the Henrico County Libertarian Party. “We have people in Washington dictating the behavior of animal owners in the heartland. We have an unelected agency, with virtually no input from individual animal owners, burdening citizens and small farms with crippling legal obligations. Hasn't Washington done enough to destroy small farms?”

Right now the program is voluntary, but according to the USDA website, the agency may institute mandatory requirements as early as 2008. The USDA claims NAIS will be helpful in tracking animal disease, yet even the agency admits it would take 48 hours after an outbreak has already been reported to track down possibly infected animals, and ignores more effective methods of post-processing meat and poultry inspection. Many small farmers and individual animal owners consider NAIS overkill, or as Vermont farmer Walter Jeffries put it, “like driving thumb tacks with a 100 lb sledge hammer.”

“Even more disturbing is the Orwellian aspect of NAIS,” says Martin. “How long before the federal government decides to put these microchips in humans?”

The Libertarian Party is organized in all 50 states and has run a candidate in every presidential election since it was formed in 1972. Locally the Libertarian Party of Henrico formed in 2002 and has a strong voice on the local political scene. Libertarians advocate returning government to its proper and limited role of protecting individual rights and ceasing other activities inconsistent with that goal.

The event is open to the general public.

References:

http://animalid.aphis.usda.gov/nais/index.shtml
http://nonais.org/
http://www.richmondliberty.org/mt/2006/10/protest_national_animal_id_pro.php
http://www.grannywarriors.com

Posted by Louis Gifford at October 21, 2006 | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

by Robert Russo

In my piece on urban sprawl I mentioned how real estate developers entice Northerners to move to our climate leading one to ask "is Richmond part of Northern Virginia?".* If the effects of this unmonitored political and cultural transplantation are true, what does one wonder about the influx of our foreign friends into this city, without bias, many of whom can’t tell us themselves or even understand such urban considerations? This week I will relate some glimpses into non-English Richmond I received during the brief time I worked as a translator.

Immigration is one of the most harrowing issues we have faced this year as a nation, for we are all immigrants ourselves but are presented with overcrowded gates, illegal residents and a thinning cultural identity. We associate these issues with Florida and California but it is in our area as well. It is a conundrum that goes beyond party lines, so I will not attempt to dissertate all its facets or propose one policy but that we should bring people’s issues to their own attention, as we must, in language they understand.

The nations of Europe are polarized on this debate, where religious freedoms are being denied Jews and Muslims to preserve a way of life.** We used to live in a world with one group advancing in political power but not culture and the other advancing in culture but not political power; now we have a world in which the superpowers are invading poor countries politico-economically while those countries are invading the superpowers culturally with their numbers.

Employers of large labor forces in Richmond such as landscapers, supply centers and janitorial services often have an Arabic, Spanish and French translator on hand and this is how I came to know my Egyptian friend. Five Egyptians were hired for his shift and he has a brother and cousin who are both convenience store managers and employers of non-English speakers, so I can only guess at the number of recent immigrants from his country in this city. He and his friends are all Christian, not Muslim, which made me wonder if there is religious persecution in his homeland. Workers born and raised in Virginia are often suspicious of these ethnic groups, wondering what it is they talk about, thinking perhaps they all live in one room and are pooling their resources here intending to return to their country and live off the proceeds.

I first picked up my friend while hitchhiking and taught him to drive, even though he had a $30,000 car gifted to him with his son’s name on the license plate. I took his son to the first dentist he had ever seen in his life, to find out he had eight cavities and a fungal infection from being hand-fed at the dinner table, and yet the father has a cell phone which I have never owned. One day I had to stop one of his buddies from towing his car home with rope (and not very good rope). To this day I am not able to ask my friend what he really thinks about life, why he is here or if he has any aspirations besides cleaning bathrooms to support his family. I watch him with his new car and cell phone oblivious to traffic lights and stop signs as people swerve to avoid him. He has no comprehension of the community in which he wants to be a citizen, its history, those who govern him, the voting process, or political matters.

One day during a meeting one of his compatriots stood up and explained, in good English, that thousands of their countrymen in Egypt want to come to America but have difficultly taking English classes because our language, and culture, are unpopular there. So we have a completely self-serving enterprise in which other cultures dislike ours but want to reap the rewards of capitalism and escape their native situations. What makes immigration a strange non-party issue is the fact that it is the lowest class (some not citizens at all) that are fighting it, so the protestations of helpless foreigners we are used to seeing on CNN are now in our own democracy.

My superior during this time said something to me that was the most startling of all. Being from DC he complained of how there is "nothing" of interest in Richmond, no reputable colleges, no major sports teams, no nightclubs. With one of our most difficult problems being the overgrowth of Richmond, what will result from these new voices coming to the table? They came here to secure their own prospects, they certainly do not care about our culture. In our quest to bring representation to these new Americans and know what they care about on a national scale, will we find they are not interested in the Constitution at all?

Having seen some of the bank tellers, tax preparers, physicians, teachers and employers that have to deal with my Egyptian friend I wonder how they have had to prepare for many exactly like him. If the police respond to a domestic disturbance and people can’t understand them then explanation must not be required for any cop to make an arrest. If a local representative can't communicate with his next door neighbor then no obligation exists to represent people. Knowing how government works and what decisions are being made is not required for my friend’s survival in this city, which raises the question, will the day come when no citizen is expected to know more than him?

*http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/26/AR2006032601175.html?nav=rss_realestate
**http://www.japnaamsingh.com/2004/11/religious-headwear-ban.html

Question of the Week: What personal experience have you had with recent immigrants and did it give you insight into the social scenario? Please send your opinions to henrico@richmondliberty.org.

If you have topics of interest to Libertarians please let us know. We welcome your input.

Posted by Robert Russo at October 17, 2006 | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

The next Henrico county LP meeting will be Wednesday, October 18th at the Dumbarton Library (6800 Staples Mill Rd) from 6:30 PM to 8:30 PM. LPHC Members are welcome to observe the meeting.

Posted by Leonard Harris at October 11, 2006 | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

by Robert Russo

Many voters automatically discount our party at election time because the issue that interests them is banking, social security or trade which they believe we cannot maintain, either because we are founded on other issues or are too ideological in general to provide solutions for a complex system. One article entitled "No Such Thing As a Free-Market Economist" reads "It seems pretty clear that explicit ideological predispositions like those embodied in the term free-market economics have no place in the social sciences.".*
Such general statements are unbecoming, like saying Orthodox Christians cannot make good economists because they believe money is evil. One's ideology does not determine their skill. What mainstream planners fail to see (in finance, the sciences, education and defense) is that every field is a political arena of competing doctrines, and theirs has simply been monopolized by a single competitor so much that there is no longer a difference, so all other methods out there "cease to be". A scientist in a developing country may hold no degree, or may refuse to abide by the code of others in his profession, but still make a discovery that rewrites textbooks. No one political faction has the power to prevent this from happening. This knowledge is what free-market economists bring to the table.
It is not just government that is elitist, it is our culture that is elitist. Anyone can be elected to office but they will still only appoint the mainstream business advisors they know about. It is these appointed men, this "club", that is a far greater threat than government because they govern the sciences, the workplace, what we are taught. A fierce debate raged over the prospect of drilling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, because the preferred methods of extraction are environmentally harmful, and yet industrialists yielded no middle ground (it is not efficiency that prevents people from backing alternative technologies but priority, even if you have to draw oil ten times slower with one tenth of the environmental impact).**
An unspoken rule of government spending is that quality materials and labor must be bought at top dollar. A state park in Virginia with a condemned building on its grounds must leave it standing until it can afford a grant for a top-notch reconstruction, even though there is a full staff of groundsmen capable of bulldozing it. One can imagine the spending cuts that would be accomplished by appointing minds such as the NASA designer who builds a spacecraft by getting the same quality materials and performance at a quarter of the usual cost. A panel assembled by a free-market economist would be a true cross-section of American industry with every approach represented down to the genius who works out of his basement.
"…whatever the subconscious influence of ideology, economists—and academics more generally—have a professional responsibility to actively steer clear of their own ideological biases, insofar as they interfere with the truth-seeking enterprise of science."* Attitudes like this are blind to the incredible extent their own ideology governs them. Capitalism itself is an ideology. There is no truth-seeking enterprise in economics because it is based entirely on speculation (money has value because people agree it has value). It is dependent on a small vein of experts with far more eloquent dissertations than this one simply because they have spent their lives studying this game. A free-market economist doesn’t play games. He brings the wisdom of reality into the equation.
Economy is a growing pit of dependency that burdens the consumer from spending as he chooses (much like the workplace steals his time so that he cannot spend his life as he chooses), requiring greater brilliance from each generation to make it work. A free-market system encourages honest bartering and a life of personal choice and responsibility, therefore it is freedom from economy that Libertarian leadership provides. It’s easy for members of the dominant method to assume everyone is a subscriber and differences represent oversight, when in fact people have different values. The current administration holds maintenance as its highest priority whereas an anarchist sees destruction as the key to success in a stagnant system. So we are not like the Green Party where people assume we put our economic interests on the back burner, we have a very clear vision of economy. Like the oil companies this is not a threat to what is needed, but to what the leading faction wants, the prospect that their field will take a different turn for the first time in their lives. For information on free-market economics go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_market.

*http://the-idea-shop.com/article/42/no-such-thing-as-a-free-market-economist
**http://www.savearcticrefuge.org/

Question of the Week: Many libertarians support privatization of business, but many Americans believe private corporations themselves are as corrupt as government agencies. Is there a middle ground? Please send your opinions to henrico@richmondliberty.org.

If you have topics of interest to Libertarians please let us know. We welcome your input.

Posted by Robert Russo at October 10, 2006 | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)