A discussion with Mike Church

dr-danielson-and-the-king-dude-10-26-2007-2.mp3

Bil Danielson, co-author of The Price of Sin (Xlibris Publishing), had the opportunity to chat briefly with Mike Church on his nationally syndicated radio talk show (Sirius Radio, Channel 144). The discussion surrounded Mr. Danielson’s ongoing frustration with Republicans of virtually every stripe who continue to make the irrational argument for lowered tax rates on the premise that it will return more revenue to the governments in question.

While this is clearly one of the effects of lowered tax rates, it is Mr. Danielson’s opinion (and one we clearly agree with here at TPOS) that this is an irrational, untenable position for individuals who purport to believe in smaller, limted government – ostensibly the hallmark of the GOP. The problem, as Mr. Danielson points out, is that if you are going to lower tax rates it ought not be for the purpose of increasing the size and scope of the government! Rather, lowered tax rates are right and proper because they return money to the people who earned it, thus increasing their freedom and liberty by virtue of keeping more of what they earn.

Socialism

I love retelling the story of running into two socialists from Hanover. It was in a bar in Garmisch in February of 2003, after I had raced 50 kilometers in an cross country ski event up in Oberammergau. I was enjoying several tall, cold, wheat beers and had just returned to the bar for another round. I ordered several more beers for myself and my fellow Americans, and apparently my accent gave me away.

Being from Wisconsin, I am often mistaken for a Canadian. There were two mid-twenty aged guys at the bar next to me and after I put my order in, one of them asked me if I was Canadian. I said, “no, I am an American.” They both raised their eyebrows and it was game on..

The beers appeared and one of my buddies took all but mine and I stayed at the bar to chat with these two, learning they were from Hanover. The two were clearly politically minded as they immediately asked me if I was happy with “your cowboy President.” I told them then that I believed George W. Bush was a step in the right direction following Bill Clinton (of course, this was after we attacked Afghanistan but before invading Iraq-which I initially supported-in what is now clearly an evangelical’s war of self-sacrifice, in my humble view) . They both said they liked Bill Clinton much more. Well, one thing led to another and I asked them about their country, to which they began extolling the virtues of socialism (far more prevalent in the north of Germany than down in Bavaria). I then asked them why, and they said they were big fans of Marx. I told them I found this incredible, given that we were sitting in a bar at the foothills of the Alps on the border with Austria, home of the man who almost singlehandidly destroyed Marx.

Both looked at me with utter confusion on their faces. Who, they asked, was I talking about. I said, “surely you have read and studied Von Mises?” Neither one had ever heard of the man, let alone read any of his works. I was stunned, and began to articulate only a few of his ideas. I grabbed a piece of paper and wrote down the following:

Please read this book – Socialism, by Ludwig Von Mises. It will clear up everything for you and help you immensely.

Well, we debated a bit more at the bar and I turned and joined my fellow ski racing buddies to recount my amazement. To this day I am still stunned that two kids from Germany do not know of Von Mises and his demolishment of socialism and Marxist ideology.

Socialism: An Economic and Sociological Analysis
by Ludwig von Mises

This masterwork is much more than a refutation of the economics of socialism (although on that front, nothing else compares). It is also a critique of the entire intellectual apparatus that accompanies the socialist idea, including the implicit religious doctrines behind Western socialist thinking, a cultural critique of socialist teaching on sex and marriage, an refutation of syndicalism and corporatism, an examination of the implications of radical human inequality, an attack on war socialism, and refutation of collectivist methodology.

In short, Mises set out to refute socialism, and instead pulled up the socialist mentality from its very roots. For that reason, Socialism led dozens of famous intellectuals, including a young F.A. Hayek, into a crisis of faith and a realist/libertarian political orientation. All the collectivist literature combined cannot equal the intellectual achievement of this one volume.

Give Me Sucession Or Give Me Death

No man thinks more highly than I do of the patriotism, and abilities, of the worthy men and women who serve our nation, and state, as elected representatives. But different individuals see the same issues in profoundly different ways; and, consequently, I would hope that my comments to follow will be taken not with the connotation of disrespect if my position is profoundly opposed to those in the seats of political power. Fellow citizens, this is no time in our history for ceremony. There is nothing in what has been accomplished to date here in Wisconsin, or out in Washington, for which we should, in full retrospect, rejoice. Ours is now a legacy of tyranny, we have allowed the very documents of freedom to be bastardized into enslaving mechanisms which have brought us into bondage; tyranny of the people, by its government. I should consider it treasonous not to raise this matter now and, moreover, an act of shear cowardice and disloyalty towards the human race for whom life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness I revere above all other things.

It is to be expected for those buying into the interventions and usurpations of liberty to indulge in the illusion of hope. If we should just elect a new gang to guide us, all will be better but the reality tells a different story. We are apt to shut our eyes against the painful truth. The truth of reality, for it is real. We listen to the siren of the gods who tell us that spending, the effect, can bring us wealth, the cause. We sit transfixed as we are transformed into bickering acrimonious gangs pitted against one another as both victim and parasite. Are we now relegated to a species who, having eyes, see not, and, having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern the essence of their liberty? For me, I am willing to know the whole truth, I have endeavored to find it out, to know the worst, provide for it and now warn my fellow man of its gravity.

I have but one pair of eyes by which I can see into this universe and they have learned that existence exists, that A is A. We can only know that which is real and to presume the future can be ignorant of the past is to purchase the fallacy of man’s greatest errors. Judging by the past, we have seen the tyranny grow with each usurpation of liberty taken like a stolen kiss leaving the living with only a fleeting belief that in another generation, or in some other dimension, victory and freedom will be ours. Suffer not to be betrayed by this kiss for it is the kiss of death worship and sacrifice. Let us not be deceived, these contrivances and handouts of a leviathan government are the implements of subjugation and tyranny. Can there be any other motive than the abject equalization of all men? To what other end could such a course lead us? We have argued hard and long in opposition to this nightmare of slinking socialism. We have done everything that could be done to alert those who purport to represent our liberty but sold us all down the river of statism. We have petitioned; we have remonstrated; we have supplicated, we have prostrated ourselves before the very halls of government, and have implored its interposition to arrest its growing tyrannical hands and its web of influence and dependency. Our petitions have been slighted; our remonstrances have produced additional insults; our supplications have been disregarded; and we have been spurned, with contempt, from the local boards of education, to the halls of the state capital, to the floor of congress, and the presidency itself. In vain could we only hope of reconciliation at this late date. There is no longer any room for hope and even less for any foolish compromises. If we wish to be free-if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending-if we mean not basely to abandon the nobel struggle in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained-we must separate from this bastardized union! I repeat it, sir, we must leave this nation at once! An appeal to secession and to the freedom of mankind is all that is left us!

They tell us that we are extreme, that modern society has moved beyond the quaint notions of individual liberty and freedom, that it is “democracy” which is the god to which we should worship. But this god is a god of sacrifice, not for us but by us. What event will it take to move our souls to act? Will it be next year, or the year after? Will it take an avowed socialist elected as president before we rebel? Or a United Nations to which we are subordinate in all affects? Shall we garner strength by irresolution and inaction? Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance by lying supinely on our backs and hugging the delusive phantom of hope, until our enemies have us fully enslaved at both the rhetorical and literal point of a gun? We are anything but extreme, if by extreme one implies an absolute demand for those inalienable rights granted to us by our enlightened forefathers. The battle is not to the intellectuals alone; it is to the vigilant, the practical, the traders and businessmen, the brave men and women who are willing to stand up and speak, write and argue for our independence from the United States. Make no mistake about it, our chains are already forged and many of us wear them yet do not even see them. Whether we like it or not, our die has been cast, our freedom has been taken, we must act or liberty will be lost in this world forever – let the struggle begin here and now!

It is, in fact, vanity hardly to be matched to extenuate this matter. Men may cry for compromise, but there is no compromise – we are in a war of ideas and ideals, any compromise is abject failure. The next gale that sweeps from the northeast will bring more tax, more restrictions, more regulations. Why do we stand idle? What is it that you wish for? Is life so dear, your free education, health care, and subsidy system so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me sucession, or give me death!

Please note that this presentation is a rhetorical exercise meant to raise some reflections and thought by using the form and format of Patrick Henry’s 1775 speech to the Virginia House of Burgesses. Similarities the March, 1775, presentation by Patrick Henry to the Virginia House of Burgesses is purposeful – portions of that speech clearly included and on purpose, as well as one notable sentence from The Declaration of Independence.