I read ages ago that democracy ultimately devolves into despotism. We can certainly witness that these days. Therefore, it seems to me that checks & balances that were put in place to rein in government interference weren't strong enough.

And when the people themselves are ignorant politically & economically, when their interest is no deeper than their next paycheck & voting is limited to appealing to their imaginations & emotions, a nation is in deep trouble, i.e., America & other countries as well.

And America wasn't created as a democracy anyway, it was created as a Republic. Anyone care to submit an article on that difference?

DB

Having read Hans Hoppe and a recent article Hans Hoppe Welcome to Fantasy Island by Thomas Fleming editor of Chronicles here is a man who would give a good interview for your readers, he seems insightful.

Reply from The Daily Bell

Yes, Hoppe would be a great interview.

Post, PART FOUR.

DEMOCRACY IS FOUNDED ON MANKIND'S MODEL JUSTICE SYSTEM.

Trial by Jury is mankind's model justice system and it is the definitive Foundation of Civilisation, sine qua non. That is to say, adoption of democratic Trial by Jury differentiates civilisation from the barbarity of despotism.

Whether a society is a monarchy, a theocracy or a republic, what converts it from a despotism (a tyrannical, uncivilised state) to a democracy (the civilised state with Trial by Jury operating) is the instalment and implementation of the Trial by Jury through which the people rule.

Application where fitting of the word democracy defines the theocracy as a democratic theocracy; or a republic as a democratic republic, i.e., a democracy, as opposed to a despotic republic such as Communist China which denies the people's right to the common law Trial by Jury Justice System. (The word democracy does not replace the word republic. Of course, the republic remains a republic.)

Democracy, that is, "the people rule through Trial by Jury," is independent of and ultimately governs all the activities of popular, electoral or legislatorial voting. The referendum can take place in a democracy, but, of course, it cannot create democracy. Democracy is ONLY brought into being by Trial by Jury.

Demokratia, an ordered democratic society, is extant wherever common law Trial by Jury functions, regardless of whether in a republic, a constitutional monarchy or within a small society bereft of formal government.

The Juror is SOVEREIGN in Trial by Jury. Trial by Jury defines democracy, sine qua non. Within a Hellenic or modern democracy, the Jury comprises the Supreme Legislature and Judicature.

THIS CASE RULING EXEMPLIFIES DEMOCRACY AT WORK:

"If the jury feels the law is unjust, we recognise the undisputed power of the jury to acquit even if its verdict is contrary to the law as given by the judge, and contrary to the evidence."

"If the jury feels that the law under which the defendant is accused is unjust, or that exigent circumstances justified the actions of the accused, or for any reason which appeals to their logic or passion, the jury has the power to acquit, and the courts must abide by that decision."

United States v. Moylan; U.S. Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, 1969, 417 F. 2d 1002.

Neither in the United States, Britain, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, nor in ALL of Europe and elsewhere, have legislatures ever been invested by the People with authority to impair the powers, to change the oaths, or abridge the jurisdiction of jurors to govern government; nor to remove the universal Right of the accused to the Trial by Jury of peers for any charge or offence whatever, however serious or trivial.

Today, U.S. v Moylan is NOT exemplified by the modus operandi of courts. Democracy has been overturned by politicians and judiciary.

The authentic Trial by Jury Justice System operates either

(i) as a means of cost-free* private civil, criminal or fiscal prosecution to establish rights and punish or obtain redress for wrongs, including those committed by persons in government, or

(ii) as a right by which to establish a person's innocence in defence from prosecution.

*NO ONE who infracts legem terr common law is 'immune' to prosecution. According to constitutional common law, cost-free prosecutions can be brought by private citizens to a Trial by Jury. It is not the 'preserve' of the state prosecution service and the legal profession. However, vexatious and malicious litigation which wastes the court's (i.e., the jury's) time can be decided upon and fined by juries.

Kenn d'Oudney. Author.
Click to view link

Reply from The Daily Bell

Very insightful commentary. Thanks for the historical frame of reference.

Post, PART THREE.

DEMOCRACY.

The Sciences of Etymology, Semantics, Semasiology, and Philology define democracy and determine whether one's country is a democracy, or one's government within a republic or constitutional monarchy is a despotism.

Viz. The word 'democracy' is widely abused and 'defined' incorrectly: Democracy is a state of society realised NEITHER by referenda (mass voting for new laws), NOR by suffrage (electoral voting for representatives), NOR by the representatives' majorities' legislatorial voting. Electoral voting, majority rule and 'consensus politics' neither create nor define democracy.

The incorrectness of those cited misinterpretations is exposed here below by the following definitive information.

THE WORD.

To preclude arbitrary (i.e., tyrannical; illegal) government and establish liberty and equal justice for all, the Hellenes created the society in which the common people have the power in Trial by Jury to judge the laws and overrule laws and measures enacted by the national assembly. The WORD the Hellenes gave to describe this state of society in which the citizens have control through the Trial by Jury to judge, make and enforce the laws and overrule the government, the wealthy and powerful, the aristocrats and all the people who sought to rule them, was 'demokratia', which translates into English as Democracy.

Democracy is founded on the Trial by Jury, derived from the Hellenic Athenian Constitution of government by Trial by Jury. Through its etymology, history and signification, the word democracy designates the constitutional justice system. Modern Constitutional Democracy is based on the sovereignty of the individual citizen-juror as the final arbiter of law and protection of the people from tyranny.

The Hellenic Athenian Constitution of government by Trial by Jury was a conspicuous achievement in human history for constitutionally establishing this unique mode of justice. The aristocrat Cleisthenes it is who must be credited with the creation of mankind's first democracy in 508/7 B.C.E. He brought acknowledgement to the need to spread empowerment throughout society to promote equal justice, liberty, peace and prosperity, and devolved power all the way down to the poorest (male) citizens, the thetes, by recognising rights, exousia.

Exousia rights included the right to attend, debate and vote in the national assembly on laws and measures (referenda); the right of the accused to a Trial by Jury; and, crucially, the empowerment of citizens by bestowing on them judicial authority in Trial by Jury in which laws and measures passed by legislatorial majorities in the assembly could be judged, overruled and annulled* whenever this was deemed by the Jurors necessary to serve justice, liberty, and the interests of the people.

*See Works, vol. 2; by co-author of the U.S. Constitution Justice James Wilson.

Democracy created the illustrious Athens which successfully resisted the Persian invasions of 490 and 480/79 at the battles of Marathon and Salamis; that built the Parthenon; set enduring standards in art and architecture; developed sciences including those of medicine, mathematics and astronomy; that proffered a stage to Aeschylus, Sophocles, Euripides and Aristophanes; and laid the foundations of Western rational and critical thought. Hellenic Greece of the Constitution of government by Trial by Jury received from the Athenians the defining epithet, Democracy.

The historical facts about Democracy in Hellenic Greece and everywhere else, are that it was a virile system and devotedly supported by the mass of just, civilised, peace and freedom-loving people. Democratic free Athens eventually only succumbed because of the mighty invasion of the Macedonian, Alexander the Great (conqueror), whose far-flung martial exploits set back the socio-political development of mankind.

Naturally, people have the moral responsibility, the right and the duty to resist and suppress injustice wherever it occurs, and by whomsoever it is perpetrated, governments notwithstanding. By definition and in practice, Democracy requires that the People at all times retain the Supreme Power to annul injustices and the bad laws made by fallible politicians.

This Power is uniquely embodied in the Citizen-Juror's Duty in Trial by Jury: to judge the justice of every act of law enforcement, and to render the Not Guilty Verdict whenever conviction or punishment of the accused would be unfair, according to the juror's conscience.

In pan-European legem terrae common law (as constitutionally inscribed into Magna Carta in England in 1215), it is the jurors' duty in the Trial by Jury Justice System to judge the justice of the law and every act of enforcement and acquit any persons accused under an arbitrary, unjust or apocryphal statute, regulation or prosecution. Trial by Jury is the central tenet and sole justice system of the People's legem terr common law which is superior to statutes or regulations made by national or local governments and the rulings of judges.

Consider Harlan F. Stone, U.S. Chief Justice 1941-1946, on the Juror's Duty in the authentic Trial by Jury, as follows:

"If a juror feels that the statute involved in any criminal offence is unfair, or that it infringes upon the defendant's natural God-given unalienable or Constitutional rights, then it is his duty to affirm that the offending statute is really no law at all and that the violation of it is no crime at all, for no one is bound to obey an unjust law."

"That juror must vote Not Guilty regardless of the pressures or abuses that may be heaped on him by any or all members of the jury with whom he may in good conscience disagree. He is voting on the justice of the law according to his own conscience and convictions and not someone else's. The law itself is on trial quite as much as the case which is to be decided."
U.S. Chief Justice Harlan F. Stone; Harvard Law Review.
(Emphases added.)

ETYMOLOGY
(linguistic derivation)

Hellenic Greek, Demokratia, Democracy.
demos, the people; kratos, sovereignty*, power; kratein, to rule.

*Perseus Digital Library, Tufts University. See Democracy Defined Essay EIS#10, "We the People and the Matter of Words," downloadable for free from the Democracy Defined Campaign Material webpage.
Chambers Dictionary, etymology, demos, the people; kratein, to rule;
MSN Encarta. Democracy, demos, the people; kratein, to rule;
etc.

From the etymology comes the definition: DEMOCRACY, the form of government in which the Sovereign Supreme Power is vested in the Common People; the emancipation and ethos of society produced by the power of Juries of ordinary citizens in Trial by Jury, to vet, make, decide and enforce the law; the people rule.

In order to understand the meaning of the word, it is essential to know first that democracy embodies the people's responsible control over government and law through the Trial by Jury. The people control the government, not the other way around. The people rule. This is democracy.

Regarding 'divisibility' of sovereignty: If the elected body imposes any law or regulation which is inconsistent with the People's sense of justice and fairness, it requires annulment by jurors in Trial by Jury, even by a SINGLE juror (unanimity required), who may be part of a minority race or group unfairly discriminated against by the law. In this manner, through the Trial by Jury, sovereignty not only resides with the people as a collective whole, but importantly, it is also embodied 'divisibly' with every adult citizen. Trial by Jury is thereby the active principle of democracy: the people rule.

continued...

Kenn d'Oudney. Author.
Click to view link

Post, PART TWO:

LEGEM TERR IS THE COMMON LAW AND VICE VERSA.

The genuine common law must be differentiated from that which modern government has corrupted by legislation; a COUNTERFEIT which is "common law" in name only.

Common law is emphatically neither "government-made" nor "judge-made." Modern usurpation notwithstanding, common law does not consist of case precedents (stare decisis), for juries decide the law (which includes the sentence), in each individual case.

Likewise, it is a profoundly damaging modern malicious fiction of premeditated obfuscation, public miseducation and propaganda to INVENT for 'legem terr' as a so-called 'meaning', "all the laws in force within a country" or similar. As shown in this and the previous post, it most certainly is NOT that ! On the contrary, to the eternal chagrin of scheming ambitious politicians and the self-important judiciary, legem terr is the supreme law OVER the statutes and courts of government.

Legem terr common law emplaces the all-powerful People's Courts of Constitutional Trial by Jury, and it provides the methods, means, defining criteria, and the Trial by Jury mechanism for JUDGING the justice and the legality of all governments, laws, courts (judges), and the inherent guilt or innocence in the motives and actions of people.

Whereas statutes may express some of the common law, this latter itself contains no statutes of governments, nor rulings of judges. Legem terr common law became the pan-European, and subsequently pan-Occidental phenomenon which prescribes and defines the Trial by Jury as its central tenet and sole justice system.

Sir Matthew Hale: "The COMMON LAW is sometimes called, by way of eminence, lex terr, as in the statute of Magna Carta, chap. [article] 29, where certainly THE COMMON LAW is principally intended by those words, aut per LEGEM TERR; as appears by the exposition thereof in several subsequent statutes; and particularly in the statute of 28 Edward III, chap. 3, which is but an exposition and explanation of that statute. Sometimes it is called lex Angli, as in the statute of Merton, cap. 9, Nolumus leges Angli mutari,' etc. (We will that the laws of England be not changed.) Sometimes it is called lex et consuetudo regni (the law and custom of the kingdom); as in all commissions of oyer and terminer; and in the statutes of 18 Edward I, and de quo warranto, and divers others. But most commonly it is called THE COMMON LAW, or the Common Law of England; as in the statute Articuli super Chartas, chap. 15, in the statute 25 Edward III, chap. 5 (4) and infinite more records and statutes."
1 Sir Matthew Hale's History of the Common Law, p. 128.

Crabbe: "It is admitted, on all hands, that it (Magna Carta) contains nothing but what was confirmatory of THE COMMON LAW, and the ancient usages of the realm, and is, properly speaking, only an enlargement of the charter of Henry I, and his successors."
Crabbe's History of the English Law, p. 127.

Blackstone: "It is agreed by all our historians that the Great Charter of King John was, for the most part, compiled from the ancient customs of the realm, or the laws of Edward the Confessor; by which they mean the old COMMON LAW, which was established under our Saxon princes."
Blackstone's Introduction to the (Great) Charters; Blackstone's Law Tracts, p. 289.

Coke (a High Court judge): "They (Magna Carta and Carta de Foresta) were, for the most part, but declarations of the ancient COMMON LAWS of England, to the observation and keeping whereof the king (the government) was bound and sworn."
Preface to 2 Coke's Institutes, p. 3.

See TRIAL BY JURY: Its History, True Purpose and Modern Relevance, ISBN 9781902848723; SRC Publishing, London.
And the constitutional, historical and law texts of Blackstone, Crabbe, Palgrave, Kelham, Mackintosh, Coke, Gilbert, Hume, Turner, Hallam, Stewart, Hale, et al.

THE ILLEGALITY OF THE STATUS QUO.

Today, the private and state controlled mass media, publishing, governments, bureaucrats and state education are active in falsifying the lexicons, and re-writing and obscuring the timeless precepts of law, history, culture and justice which were inspiration and basis to the civilising achievements of the people's past; viz. demonstrated above, the falsification and obscuration of the meaning of pivotal legal terms such as legem terr common law. There is nothing new in this "re-education" activity, except perhaps the degree of speed and intensity with which it is being carried out. The reach of pernicious propaganda is much facilitated with a television in nearly every household.

In this way, it is intended that the future course of history will be bent into allowing the execution of the morbid schemes and the illegal ambitions of a supra-national financial-corporate oligarchy which is largely covert and not accountable to any public body. Without sensible resistance from the people, the ascending tyranny will succeed. Wars, coups, assassinations, global financial crises, strife, crime, misery, poverty, famine are manifestations already caused by this hidden government, unseen but not unfelt.

Kenn d'Oudney. Author.
Click to view link

Reply from The Daily Bell

And for the rest ...

Post, PART ONE:

DEFINING LEGEM TERR, COMMON LAW AND JUDICIUM PARIUM.

The members of the legal profession who are Members of the Democracy Defined RESTORATION Campaign have learnt from this educational campaign and point out that the timeless legem terr common law and the proper workings of the Trial by Jury Justice System have not been taught at law schools for a generation or more. Knowing the precise meaning of the words "legem terr," "common law" and "judicium parium" is indispensable. Knowledge and understanding of judicium parium, the Mechanism of Equal Justice by which the Civilised Society is created, have long been in the possession of humankind.

Derived from Natural Law, Equity and Justice, legem terr common law is applicable in all times and places: it is not geographically constrained to a particular culture, religion or people, or limited to a set time or era. All people are subject to and bound by legem terr law of the land, including executive, legislature, and the judiciary. Very early well-known examples of common law derived from universal natural law are, "Thou shalt do no murder," and "Thou shalt not steal," and "Thou shalt not bear false witness [lie]," and "Do unto others as you would they do unto you."

Common law is common in the sense that it is common to all mankind; people everywhere share it in common; it applies to every man and woman without exception: all are subject to it; and it is the duty of all people to recognise and uphold the supremacy of common law. Theists like to call natural law and justice "God's Law."

The central tenet and sole legal justice system of legem terr common law is the authentic Trial by Jury (as distinct from the illegal charade which replaces it today). The pan-European legem terr common law defines and prescribes the Trial by Jury (inscribed into articles of Magna Carta, the Great Charter Constitution in England in 1215), as adopted by ALL the legitimate constitutions for the trial of all (unimpeachable) causes (lawsuits) and crimes, civil, criminal and fiscal.

Although Common Law can be written APPROXIMATELY, it is not 'a written law'. That law which is written down and enacted by parliaments and congresses becomes A STATUTE: as such, it is not 'common law'. Note that it is one of the Juror's Duties definitive of Trial by Jury, to judge the justice of those laws which governments write down and seek to enforce on the People. Likewise, the judiciary is an arm of government. Whatever a judge 'rules' (stare decisis), it is an act of and by government. It is not 'common law'.

By contrast, Common Law is expressed as the decisions of Jurors dictated by their conscience in the Trial by Jury: that is, the judgements (judicium; judgements, verdicts and sentences) produced by Jurors' sense of right and wrong and fairness in the treatment of fellow citizens in every act of the enforcement of law. The Common Law Trial by Jury Justice System is the mechanism through which Common Law is created, expressed, and the enactments of civilisation, liberty and equal justice are achieved. The People's Jury in Trial by Jury forms the Supreme Legislature and Judicature.

Constitutional legem terr common law prescribes that for any charge or offence, however serious or trivial, no person shall be dispossessed, fined, punished or in any way disadvantaged, except according to the lawful judgement or sentence of a unanimous jury of adult jurors randomly chosen according to common law principles, of his or her social-equals in judicium parium: the Common Law Trial by Jury.

"Nullus liber homo capiatur, vel imprisonetur, aut disseisetur, aut utlagetur, aut aliquo modo destruatur; nec super eum ibimus, nec super eum mittemus, nisi per legale judicium parium suorum, vel per legem terr." Magna Carta, 1215, Article 39.

That is to say, government only has EXECUTIVE power to act against a person, his property or liberties by the authority of, and according to the lawful sentence of a common law jury following a legal Trial by Jury. The JUDICIAL role is the preserve of jurors. Indeed, until the Latin-derived word 'juror' was adopted, jurors were actually called THE JUDGES, in recognition of their role.

"...the judges, for so the jury were called..." See p. 55 of Crabbe's History of the English Law, etc. In Trial by Jury, the Foreman or woman of the jury is the principal presiding officer.

Continued...
Kenn d'Oudney. Author.

Click to view link

Reply from The Daily Bell

Thanks for this well-researched document.

That's majoritarian democracy, add the adjective to your democracy then perhaps we can understand each other. Ate you avoiding the issue or what?

Reply from The Daily Bell

Please feel free to explain it. Here is a simple definition(s).

Democracy

Click to view link

Government by the people, exercised either directly or through elected representatives.

A political or social unit that has such a government.
The common people, considered as the primary source of political power.

MAJORITY RULE

The principles of social equality and respect for the individual within a community.

@ DB

One more thing, if you don't define democracy then you are in the same class as our corrupt politicians who use the word again and again, and it's a suck-in for the people who in the main are not as intelligent as the staff or the feedbackers of DB.

Reply from The Daily Bell

What? What did we do? Democracy wields the majority against the minority. In its advanced stages it is little different than totalitarianism.

Click to view link

Dear TM, DB, Clayton and Hoppe, Please read the above; until you do you are doing a disservice to the understanding of liberty and freedom. Dr Philip McCormack

Reply from The Daily Bell

Well, the Bell has long-advocated common law - PRIVATE/MARKETPLACE-oriented common law.

The eloquent link you offer seems to insist on trial-by-jury common law, but we think common law was a broader concept than that and that common law could (and was) conducted by sole judges as well as juries. Just as with money-systems, we are not inclined to define, with absolute certainty, what kind of private/competitive justice system works best. We simply advocate a return to the marketplace of justice - allowing different systems to take hold as they once did - in the hope of establishing a model that seems to work most fairly and effectively.

See AFTER THOUGHTS, here ...

Click to view link

To Jewmlyn 6/13/2010 A truer statement has never been said.

The Government is managing public opinion by controlling the mass media"

If you watch only ABC CBS NBC and CNN you are only getting one side of he news.

If you are not smart enough to see it you should be at least smart enought to smell it.

"If the government stayed out of economic affairs the way it stays out of religion or journalism"

Where has he been? The government is managing public opinion by controling the mass media now. That's why we are all reading the Daily Bell!

Reply from The Daily Bell

Dr. Machan's views are obviously his own. Often they are insightful

@DB,

I apologize for being so obtuse.

"What shall we have for lunch today?" refers to the quote,
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for lunch."

Capitalism is economic democracy. You vote with your dollars in the daily competitive election of the free market. Entrepreneuers and producers who fulfill the wants and needs of consumers "win" the election and theri reward is profit. Those who do not satisfy the consumers/voters "lose" and they cannot be sustained in a free market until they adjust and find a way to satisfy the soverign consumer.

Hey Dudes!!! Wen Your Listn" to George Clinton of the Parlament/Funkadelics at 12:46 in the morning you don't really care. P-Funk got lthe mother4 shiup on. I did too much brown acid at woodstock~~~

Reply from The Daily Bell

Must be Saturday night. ...

Not only are corporations purely creations of the state, they are illegally creations of the state. Read Thom Hartmann's "Unequal Protection".Chapter 6, it was a court reporter J C Bancroft Davis with a statement in his quick summary of the case stated that corporations are persons, not the judges. The case Clara County v Southern Railway. 1886.

When Tibor Machan talks about democracy being relatively new that is a statement which not only does not define time, it does not define democracy.

There is no better site IMHO than: Click to view link for understanding the issues of democracy.

The definition: Supreme power vested in the people, upheld by Common Law Trial by Jury with nullification of laws by not guilty verdicts. They state loudly and clearly democracy is not majority rule, it is not suffrage.

What is T Ms definition of democracy? What is DBs definition of democracy? And what is Clayton,s definition of democracy? Isn't anyone defining on this blog or do we have a house of Babel?

Reply from The Daily Bell

The stated view of the Bell, a free-market, classical-liberal/libertarian newspaper, is that democracy is the God That Failed. (See Hoppe). The views of editorialists and feedbackers are their own.

J.D. Rockefeller once apparently said that competition was a crime. By this he meant that you have to destroy it and it does not matter how. Standard Oil destroyed the competition and became a cartel. The big boys are always seeking to destroy the little boys and then they want to remain in charge.

Globalism has allowed the big boys to get bigger. Which is its intention. Who gets to be a big boy? Well you need finance to be a big boy so the bankers decide. Controlling the issuing of credits or loans enables you to pick and choose and extend your network. Thats how it works.

And they can always cut you off or freeze your account if you go off track. Only a few people like Henry Ford, have been able to criticize the money changers and still survive.

Reply from The Daily Bell

"Competition is a sin." -John D. Rockefeller

Theory is useful, but only so far. People need to get into the particulars of things to arrive at sound judgments.

Here are some of those particulars in relation to BP:

Click to view link

Notice, that the oil spill has allowed this to go through:

Click to view link

An analogy: a man can be big because he is naturally tall. That is one thing.

However, there is also a diseased condition that produces gigantism. That is another.

No sane doctor would confuse the two.

Most mega corporations on the global stage are diseased. But many libertarians continue to regard them as the standard of health.

Reply from The Daily Bell

Very good analogy.

I would strongly urge anyone interested in this issue concerning Democracy to read Hans Herman Hoppe's book, "Democracy the God That Failed."

The notion put forward by the Neo-Conservatives of so-called Democratic Capitalism is a self-contradiction in terms. Private Property is based on the distinction that I own this, not you. Yet, in the context of Democracy, all property is rendered to the condition of mob rule.

Given the well documented lowest common denominator aspect of Group Think and the fickleness of crowd behavior, Democracy is a means of creating social chaos. Out of this chaos comes the cry for order. However, having destroyed the previously existing order, the New Order that comes about is not created by the spontaneous peaceful interaction of individuals in their mutual pursuit of their own self-interests, but rather the violently imposed order of the Strong Man.

From Spontaneous Order, through Democratic Chaos, we arrive at the Arbitrary Order of the Vicious. To mask this process, the perpetrators of the New World Order (the Power Elite) maintain the appearance of democratic activity everywhere possible, while doing pretty much as they please in all those areas of the political economy that they consider essential to their control and continued concentration and expropriation of wealth.

That freedom loving individuals still give credence to the high mindedness implied in Democracy, is in my mind a huge disappointment.

As for the weak and the poor, their fate will be as it has always been determined by the strong and capable. The question that they and their advocates must ask, is in whom should that strength and capacity reside? Should it reside with individuals who have by their own just, non-violent value adding activity created in concert with others the capacity to assist the less "fortunate", or should that capacity be in the hands of tyrants and exploiters?

This is a core question for all those who self-describe themselves to be libertarians. Either one has faith in the Compassion innate in the character of men, or one does not. Perfection is not possible, but a fair measure of Good is. The human race would not have survived and prospered as it has, had not a great deal of empathy governed its evolution.

I will put my trust in Justice, not the ballot box.

Reply from The Daily Bell

Excellent summary of Hoppe, thanks.

There has been a Marxist(anti-messiah) takeover of our Presidency, House, Senate, and very soon out Supreme Court to end this "Republic" as we know it. And "we the people" voted for it, or at least the overwhelming "women" vote did!

The campaign promise made was that "I'm going to fundamentally transform the American system government!" That precisely means into Marxism(anti-messiah, according to Karl Marx himself)! Who is the new enemy? Read about the "Weathermen Movement" that started in the 60's in Chicago to have a small population of people rule the Western World through the U.N.(That's in the book of Daniel, too)!

You do know that 70% of the U.N. Countries are in Africa, right? You also know that they make up about 11 1/2 % of the world population also, don't you? You do know that they have no veto power also, right? Watch!

I think that T. Machan is right about big corporations. Also Libertarians do not differentiate between small and big companies. All are good as long as they obey the law. It was correctly pointed out in the article that it is governmental involvement in business makes the difference that always has bad consequences for populace. In socialist countries like the Soviet Union this involvement reached exactly 100%, in "capitalist" countries of North America is could be 20%-30% or even more. In the ideal society where free market rules this percentage should be

Another word for this symbioses between government and private business is CORRUPTION.

The true problem is not to choose more or less democracy. The problem is to reach a balance between the society and "smart and reach" guys in power at which both parties will benefit, and not only the latter one.