Trackback message
Title: More Reactions to Kelo
Excerpt: A round up of the reactions to Kelo v. New London, today's Supreme Court decision that dramatically extended the powers of government and shredded the 5th Amendment. My own response and my earlier post on the value of Originalism. Brad...
Blog name: Eric's Grumbles Before The Grave
Trackback message
Title: …
Excerpt: I am beyond words right now. Beyond disgust.
The Supreme Court of the United States has decided today that individual property rights do not exist.
I don’t… I don’t
I can’t find words right now.
But I’m sure the ...
Blog name: Striderweb
Maybe we need to start TAKING guns to Connecticut! This is a travesty...one that should not stand. There are a couple lawsuits here in the Cincinnati area on basically the same subject-the local government trying to take away private citizen's homes to give them to developers...homes in areas that are in no way blighted. I can just imagine how they feel now.
That's the "deal" in ANY GOVERNMENT, John, you and I both agree on that, and yet I notice that you prefer it here to Somalia, no? Or any other country.
The difference is that the myths under which this nation was formed told us that government would be restricted, that such excesses would be restrained. Largely they were.
No longer. We've slipped over the edge. We're now hurtling down the slope.
The constant harping of idealists like YOU (and that includes the socialist idealists who are a far greater force than anarcho-capitalists) and the purposeful destruction of the education system have resulted in the loss of widespread belief in those myths, and the decay of the system.
It's a cycle. As Heinlein said, the worst thing about living in the declining era of a civilization is knowing that you are.
Perhaps he was wrong. Perhaps the worst thing about living in the declining era of a civilization is knowing the people who are throwing fuel on the pyre?
I don't know what you think the eventual outcome of this cycle will be, but I'm pretty damned sure it won't be more individual freedom.
"I don't know what you think the eventual outcome of this cycle will be, but I'm pretty damned sure it won't be more individual freedom."
Historically, isn't the trend to get more free, not less? Of course, that trend is only visible if you look at things over the long term, and I suspect that things will get MUCH worse before they get better.
Honestly, this straw has pretty much broken my camel's back, because I can't see much point in working to own anything (not just real estate) if the government can take away my ability to own a place to store it.
A news story hasn't made me this physically ill in a very long time.
I feel like a rug has been pulled out from under me - that wherever I decide to live and not be a rent-slave, I'm still not safe from avaricious developers and local governments.
Heck, even renters should be reminded that their homes can be taken away, too, if the landlord owns property desired by others.
I don't particularly care for Mark Levin (I think he's an authoritarian conservative, not a libertarian conservative), but I think he got it right about our overreaching Supreme Court.
Kevin, what frightens me is the phrase that I cannot get out of my head whenever I think about this terrible and tremendous turn of events. It goes something like this: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State..."
Does this ruling apply to things besides real estate?
I collect comics. If I sell those comics, I make a certain amount of income, which can be taxed, right? If a rich comic collector discovers that I have the last copy of a particular comic, and I refuse to sell, can he then go to a local politician and get them to force me to sell to generate tax revenue?
I realize that's a somewhat insane example, and that I could probably come up with an example that wasn't quite so out there, but is there a fundamental difference between real estate and any other kind of property?
Kevin, what frightens me is the phrase that I cannot get out of my head whenever I think about this terrible and tremendous turn of events. It goes something like this: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State..."
Individ, did you read the decision? It's an affirmation of State's Rights.
>>I don't know what you think the eventual outcome of this cycle will be...
The outcome of a cycle depends on where the endlessly turning wheel happens to be when you die, because there are not permanent, fixed for all time solutions.
It has been said that the inevitable outcome of any government is that it will grow in power at the expense of the liberty of its citizens.
That is the nature of liberty: it is guarded only by constant vigilance.
The founders knew this, and that's why they built into government a number mechanisms designed to both slow up governmental growth and the entropy of liberty, and further provided numerous means for pruning our government back.
For everyone whose property isn't condemned, it makes sense to hold off on the cartridge boxes for the time being, but it's pretty clear it's time to get real busy with soap, ballot, post and jury boxes.
The mechanisms of liberty are not self maintaining. They need constant tending by men and women of character.
Sadly, the mechanisms of tyranny into which all systems tend to degenerate don't seem to have that liability.
For all its horrors and faults, it was a bad day when the Roman Empire fell. And it was a horrible time during the Roman Republic to see it transform into an empire bent on eventual self-suicide.
That is America today. That is what this decision means. And that is what will happen, because there exists no group of men who have the power and authority of the Founders to do anything about this situation. The Constitution, a great document, always had a time-clock - one attached to men of character. Now that such men are outside the realm of power in this country, it's only a matter of time. And it sucks, because I think that what the Founders did was great. But they underestimated the ability of wicked men to game the system.
my only hope is that this may come about full circle like the AWB did. before that we had a lot fewer states that were 'shall issue', we actually took more ground than we lost in the balance. Maybe we can get the NRA-ILA to branch out a bit.
I didn't recall Heemeyer's name, but I did remember his actions - as soon as I saw the town name Granby. He was indeed another Carl Drega.
I'm afraid that this is what it has come to - more people being pushed past their breaking point. If so, the best way we can honor their memory is to make sure that their actions are widely publicized.
Government officials need to know that they can only push so far, lest they reap unintended consequences.
How is Winkle's grievance any more valid than Dorothy LaFortune's http://www.no-treason.com/archives/2003/11/30/barely-a-footnote/
or that of any other poor schlep whose property or wealth is confiscated by the government. Sandra Day O'Connor and all the other dissenting Justices can kiss my ass.
Government officials need to know that they can only push so far, lest they reap unintended consequences.
What kind of unintended consequences? Groups of mad as hell, pitchfork wielding voters marching to the polls to reinforce Kevin's Grand Delusion with a vengeance? http://tinyurl.com/e3p64
Come on Scott, http://tinyurl.com/9zab4 If the outrageous theft of Willie Jones's property didn't make a ripple way back when, this latest ruling by your Supreme Court isn't going to provoke the herd into anything but predictable mass wankery for the next election cycle.
Bill Von Winkle now has three choices: Submit, go to jail, or die. His legal options are finished. And still this isn't the straw that will break the camel's back.
But it ought to be.
Thank God your government's got those built in checks and balances.
One of those checks, Lynette, is supposed to be an armed populace. Government officials getting seriously dead for overstepping their power can have a restraining effect. But as I've said on several occasions previously, we failed to take Jefferson's advice and shoot early enough to be effective.
Can we still vote Von Winkle some protection? Possible, but doubtful.
Would Billy Beck's recommendation of mass civil disobedience be effective? Possible, but doubtful.
Here's the thing I've got against you and the rest of the anarcho-capitalist crowd: You don't suggest anything useful yourselves. (Billy's civil disobedience concept is attractive, but doomed by our "cult of material well-being.") You just proclaim it all crap, pay your taxes to stay out of jail, and sit around waiting for the inevitable collapse - all the while hurling insults at anyone who doesn't see the world your way. As someone emailed me tonight; "The thing that is a non-starter for me is the assumption that I am not -- cannot be -- sincere or honest in my position, not to mention the explicit statement that my support for civil courts makes me morally equivalent to Pol Pot. It's the (senseless!) vitriol I cannot stand, and to date I've never met an anarchist of any stripe who could go an entire paragraph without foaming at the mouth."
I don't think it's quite that bad, but check your lips. I think I detect a bit of spittle.
I agree with you wholeheartedly. I've never placed much faith in the material world anyway, since it will always fail you eventually. It's religion, for me, that keeps me going. But nevertheless, this is truly a dark day. And I weep for the next generation, inevitibly more enslaved than me.
I just wish there was something I could do. It is a disgusting feeling to know that the government, and overall, society, is sliding down into the tubes despite one's best efforts. I am powerless.
There must be a better way than just standing alone and letting this happen to us. There HAS to be a better way.
Hmm... I just read the stories of Drega and Heemeyer.
I can support Heemeyer's actions (and find it typical that the media just reported him as a loner nutcase, rather than someone who was repeatedly wronged by selfish businesspeople and bureaucrats), but Carl Drega...
Hmmm.... I can't quite condone his shooting of civil servants, a woman in the back who was trying to run away, and an interloper who wasn't targeting him specifically, but was simply, heroically trying to stop an armed assault.
Best by the assessor's standard. I believe this policy was to make someone holding on to property waiting for the value to go up to have to pay tax at market rate rather than at vacant lot value.
The best use should be determined by the person who bought and paid for the land.
Beyond that, trying to squeeze money out of the owner at the point of a gun is purely and simply theft. Condoning it by advocating for government, as Kevin does, constitutes an open invitation to confiscation edicts like Kelo v. New London.
I've not blogged in some time because I'm so disheartend by the direction our country is going. This is just another straw in the haystack. I think this picture pretty much sums it up.
Lynette, I advocate for restrained government, which has historically worked - for a while. You advocate for no government, which hasn't historically worked anywhere it's been tried. It keeps getting overwhelmed by unrestrained governments.
What the Kelo, Raich, and McConnell decisions indicate is that the last few restraints are finally failing, and that this system of government is hurtling down the path to destruction. What comes next is anybody's guess, but I'm willing to bet it won't be your an-cap paradise - so I'm wondering why you seen so happy about it? Surely it must be something more than just "I told you so!" preening?
You see the "Just Compensation" part is the kicker to all of this.
In eminent domain cases, the compensation is rarely "just" enough to make up for the economic privation of losing the home. Not to mention the emotional issues of losing one's homestead, forced relocation, etc (pain and suffering in lawsuit-ese).
I don't know how you can be complaining about the best government in the world. We've always had eminent domain, so obviously it's what made this country great. They don't have emminent domain in Somalia, but I don't see you moving there.
We've had eminent domain (supposedly, and often but not always), restricted to public use. That restriction is now gone.
Somalia? The most heavily armed warlord is free to seize any property he cares to by force. There is no organized group of associated others to prevent him, and certainly no tissue of law.
At least here the government (still) gives you warning before opening fire.
I'm pointing out that the argument that eminent domain produces what you value in America is logically equivalent to your argument that government produces what I like in America.
I remain here because I like the markets here, compromised as they are. The government does not produce these markets any more than eminent domain does. In fact, eminent domain *is* in principle all there is to government.
Do you understand the fallacy of your argument now?
And here I sit blogging about this instead of enlisting people to write their congressional and senatorial folks who hardly ever vote the way the PEOPLE would like; but rather the way that makes their donors happy. I wonder if their will be a revolution given the complacency of the people. I wonder if there will be a revolution because most guns are registered. We are screwed folks. Totally screwed. It's just a matter of time. Unfortunately, I don't think it will happen in our lifetimes. It will certainly happen in the lifetime of my grandchildren and perhaps my children. As Hillary said, we're going to start taking money away from those that have it and give it to those that don't. Redistribution of wealth, a socialized medical system, nobody giving a damned...we're doomed. I should be starting a revolution. I can't speak for you.
"Do you understand the fallacy of your argument now?"
I would ask the same of you. Should our government go really hard-line socialist, will the markets you like still exist here?
John, we've been over this and over this and over this until we should both be blue in the face, or our fingers should be worn down to nubs. The markets you like so much aren't produced by the American government, but they are not strangled by it, either. The American system of government has been the least restrictive form of government ever when it comes to free markets.
However, you and your an-cap compatriots have come up with nothing better.
So sit back, drink a beer or two, and watch the system that's worked better than any other - unfair as it is - decay into something really horrible. Don't lift a finger. Just sneer at those of us who were willing to shove our fingers into the dike, however futile the effort.
Just remember, when it lets go, you get swept away too.
Oh, but while Kennedy's kicking back with that beer, watching as the USA collapses, he'll be able to (rightly) say:
"Told ya so."
And bask in the glow of true anarchy....for exactly as long as it takes the first band of thugs to take over. (but of course they'll be a de facto government, hence proving him all the more right)
I don't believe that's likely to happen in our lifetimes, incidentally. But this most recent SCOTUS decision deeply disturbs me, and I believe it will ultimately cost dozens if not hundreds of lives.
I still believe that it's not too late for civil disobedience to work, but it would have to be MASSIVE.
I keep asking if "we" can work together, and I keep getting the same response, asking what "I" am doing......
Hey, anonymous, what have YOU done? I'd be willing to bet that, outside of a great deal of wailing, moaning and knashing of teeth, it's no more that when I've done.
....and which of the anarchocapitalists are you, anyway?
I'm not enjoying what's unfolding, I'm going about my business. What I've been trying to make clear here is that you cannot proceed effectively without coming to grips with the principle by which this is unfolding.
Sergeant Mac stumbled around it right here: "I keep asking if "we" can work together, and I keep getting the same response, asking what "I" am doing......"
The only courses of actions that will be effective are those you can pursue yourself.
http://tinyurl.com/bxyx8
Coordination with others is going to have to be based on more or less immediate self interest. "Let's lie down in front of the bulldozer" or "Let's see if we can outshoot the government" or "Lets all write to congress" are not going to work. If you want others to reliably work to advance your goals you're going to have to offer them something more immediate, like $X an hour.
It's not hopeless at all once you discard the hopeless strategies.
Trackback message
Title: The Road Not Taken
Excerpt: Unrestricted eminent domain would be unconstitutional. But Kelo demands no such thing. It's pro-Federalist, and bolsters a bit of judicial deference commonly confined to the legal endangered species list. I refuse to assume the sky is falling.
Blog name: No Oil for Pacifists
Unrestricted eminent domain would be unconstitutional. But Kelo demands no such thing. The Constitution doesn't compel Federal Courts to substitute their judgment for elected municipal officials.
Kelo is a pro-conservative, pro-Federalism decision that bolsters a bit of judicial deference commonly confined to the legal endangered species list. Not all developers are scum; not every Mayor's on the take--if the are, call the cops and vote against crooked councilmen next November. Isn't that what we tell liberals?:
"[T]he fact remains that state and local governments have a fair amount of power under our constitution to enact either. We often tell folks on the left that not every social ill should be cured by the courts, and that should apply no less when "conservative" interests are at stake."
Connecticut has the right to be socialist--and I have the right not to live in Connecticut.
I'm quite conservative--which is why I'm puzzled that Kelo critics on the Right sound like anti-Wal-Mart kooks. Look to state and municipal government, not federal courts, for redress. And don't assume the sky is falling.
Where we disagree, No Oil, is that Midkiff was a proper reading of the 5th Amendment - unanimous or not. It was an expansion of Berman, which was also a bad decision.
As I said, the Court backed itself into a corner. It wasn't going to overturn Midkiff, so it HAD to find against Kelo. The only thing that surprised me, as it surprised you, was that O'Connor wrote such an impassioned dissent, since she wrote Midkiff. "Oh, I didn't mean we should vacate the Takings Clause completely!"
Well I'm heading to www.ammoman.com. When they come for me I know they'll kill me........but I'll take a few of the f$%#ers with me. I guess I'll have to be satisfied with that. Your anarchist whining is sickening. If anarchy is all about the powerful taking what they want with no regard to the law America just became anarchist. Or rather maybe it's been this way for awhile? I hope they come for you anarchists first.
"I guess that explains the roaring success of anarcho-capitalism as a mechanism for producing freedom."
Kevin? Have you ever in your life read and understood Gresham's Law?
Note:
All avatars and any images or other media embedded in comments were hosted on the JS-Kit website and have been lost;
references to haloscan comments have been partially automatically remapped, but accuracy is not guaranteed and corrections are solicited.
If you notice any problems with this page or wish to have your home page link updated, please contact John Hardin <jhardin@impsec.org>
JS-Kit/Echo comments for article at http://smallestminority.blogspot.com/2005/06/sprinting-towards-despotism.html (73 comments)
Tentative mapping of comments to original article, corrections solicited.
Trackback message
Title: Kelo v New London
Excerpt: The Supreme Court has ruled (Kelo v New London)
that the government can seize your property by law, and sell it to
another private party, for no better reason than wanting more tax
revenue ("promoting econo...
Blog name: TriggerFinger
Trackback message
Title: More Reactions to Kelo
Excerpt: A round up of the reactions to Kelo v. New London, today's Supreme Court decision that dramatically extended the powers of government and shredded the 5th Amendment. My own response and my earlier post on the value of Originalism. Brad...
Blog name: Eric's Grumbles Before The Grave
Trackback message
Title: …
Excerpt: I am beyond words right now. Beyond disgust.
The Supreme Court of the United States has decided today that individual property rights do not exist.
I don’t… I don’t
I can’t find words right now.
But I’m sure the ...
Blog name: Striderweb
Maybe we need to start shipping guns to Connecticut.
You assume that there are people there willing to use them.
And that it will make a difference.
Maybe we need to start TAKING guns to Connecticut! This is a travesty...one that should not stand. There are a couple lawsuits here in the Cincinnati area on basically the same subject-the local government trying to take away private citizen's homes to give them to developers...homes in areas that are in no way blighted. I can just imagine how they feel now.
"Bill Von Winkle now has three choices: Submit, go to jail, or die."
That is the "deal" announced in the Constitution. You want people to embrace that and then live as if they reject it? Why would they?
That's the "deal" in ANY GOVERNMENT, John, you and I both agree on that, and yet I notice that you prefer it here to Somalia, no? Or any other country.
The difference is that the myths under which this nation was formed told us that government would be restricted, that such excesses would be restrained. Largely they were.
No longer. We've slipped over the edge. We're now hurtling down the slope.
The constant harping of idealists like YOU (and that includes the socialist idealists who are a far greater force than anarcho-capitalists) and the purposeful destruction of the education system have resulted in the loss of widespread belief in those myths, and the decay of the system.
It's a cycle. As Heinlein said, the worst thing about living in the declining era of a civilization is knowing that you are.
Perhaps he was wrong. Perhaps the worst thing about living in the declining era of a civilization is knowing the people who are throwing fuel on the pyre?
I don't know what you think the eventual outcome of this cycle will be, but I'm pretty damned sure it won't be more individual freedom.
BTW, you got that business that will protect Bill Von Winkle from the government fired up yet? I'm sure he'd pay well.
No?
Gee, that's too bad.
"I don't know what you think the eventual outcome of this cycle will be, but I'm pretty damned sure it won't be more individual freedom."
Historically, isn't the trend to get more free, not less? Of course, that trend is only visible if you look at things over the long term, and I suspect that things will get MUCH worse before they get better.
Honestly, this straw has pretty much broken my camel's back, because I can't see much point in working to own anything (not just real estate) if the government can take away my ability to own a place to store it.
A news story hasn't made me this physically ill in a very long time.
I feel like a rug has been pulled out from under me - that wherever I decide to live and not be a rent-slave, I'm still not safe from avaricious developers and local governments.
Heck, even renters should be reminded that their homes can be taken away, too, if the landlord owns property desired by others.
I don't particularly care for Mark Levin (I think he's an authoritarian conservative, not a libertarian conservative), but I think he got it right about our overreaching Supreme Court.
Kevin, what frightens me is the phrase that I cannot get out of my head whenever I think about this terrible and tremendous turn of events. It goes something like this: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State..."
Does this ruling apply to things besides real estate?
I collect comics. If I sell those comics, I make a certain amount of income, which can be taxed, right? If a rich comic collector discovers that I have the last copy of a particular comic, and I refuse to sell, can he then go to a local politician and get them to force me to sell to generate tax revenue?
I realize that's a somewhat insane example, and that I could probably come up with an example that wasn't quite so out there, but is there a fundamental difference between real estate and any other kind of property?
There are only three options to change this:
1) Armed revolt
2) Sessesion of states that do not aggree
3) Ammendment to the Constitution to 'clarify' the clear language that was 'misunderstood'.
The first I never want to see.
The next is as unlikly as the first.
That leaves the third.
Time to write your congress-things and sinators.
Tell them flag ammendment or not, if this stands, the thing is nothing more than a rag that will be burning for eternity.
Tom
Kevin, what frightens me is the phrase that I cannot get out of my head whenever I think about this terrible and tremendous turn of events. It goes something like this: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State..."
Individ, did you read the decision? It's an affirmation of State's Rights.
>>I don't know what you think the eventual outcome of this cycle will be...
The outcome of a cycle depends on where the endlessly turning wheel happens to be when you die, because there are not permanent, fixed for all time solutions.
It has been said that the inevitable outcome of any government is that it will grow in power at the expense of the liberty of its citizens.
That is the nature of liberty: it is guarded only by constant vigilance.
The founders knew this, and that's why they built into government a number mechanisms designed to both slow up governmental growth and the entropy of liberty, and further provided numerous means for pruning our government back.
For everyone whose property isn't condemned, it makes sense to hold off on the cartridge boxes for the time being, but it's pretty clear it's time to get real busy with soap, ballot, post and jury boxes.
The mechanisms of liberty are not self maintaining. They need constant tending by men and women of character.
Sadly, the mechanisms of tyranny into which all systems tend to degenerate don't seem to have that liability.
I wonder if the Supremes just created some more people like Carl Drega.
I wonder how many Carl Dregas it'll take.
"There are only three options to change this:"
Bullshit. Congress can impeach the fab five, and it would behoove the Bush Administration to appeal to Congress for such action....
Not that I'm holding my breath.
2000 & 2004 was quite definitely choices between lesser evils.
I wonder how many Carl Dregas it'll take.
A lot more than there will be.
Remember Marvin Heemeyer?
Pretty much nobody else does either.
For all its horrors and faults, it was a bad day when the Roman Empire fell. And it was a horrible time during the Roman Republic to see it transform into an empire bent on eventual self-suicide.
That is America today. That is what this decision means. And that is what will happen, because there exists no group of men who have the power and authority of the Founders to do anything about this situation. The Constitution, a great document, always had a time-clock - one attached to men of character. Now that such men are outside the realm of power in this country, it's only a matter of time. And it sucks, because I think that what the Founders did was great. But they underestimated the ability of wicked men to game the system.
my only hope is that this may come about full circle like the AWB did. before that we had a lot fewer states that were 'shall issue', we actually took more ground than we lost in the balance. Maybe we can get the NRA-ILA to branch out a bit.
"That leaves the third.
Time to write your congress-things and sinators"
Yeah, tell them to put *another* note in the cookie jar:
"Memo to State,
Keep your hands out of the cookie jar! (Seriously this time!)
Signed,
The State"
Sure, that might help....
Yes, John, we should all become just like you, and not do anything except pay our taxes and bitch about how unfree we all are.
As I said, at least Billy Beck walks the walk.
"The constant harping of idealists like YOU..."
(cackle)
It's your fault, Kennedy.
(hoot)
I never realized that before, but I'm squared-away, now.
No, Billy, it's not his fault. You're right. I retract the statement. Pardon me John. I was distraught, though I shouldn't be.
This is, and I've said it before, inevitable. But watching the decay accelerate is not my idea of fun.
Kevin,
I didn't recall Heemeyer's name, but I did remember his actions - as soon as I saw the town name Granby. He was indeed another Carl Drega.
I'm afraid that this is what it has come to - more people being pushed past their breaking point. If so, the best way we can honor their memory is to make sure that their actions are widely publicized.
Government officials need to know that they can only push so far, lest they reap unintended consequences.
How is Winkle's grievance any more valid than Dorothy LaFortune's http://www.no-treason.com/archives/2003/11/30/barely-a-footnote/
or that of any other poor schlep whose property or wealth is confiscated by the government. Sandra Day O'Connor and all the other dissenting Justices can kiss my ass.
Newsflash - Developers Use Eminent Domain to Acquire White House
http://armedvictim.blogspot.com/
Government officials need to know that they can only push so far, lest they reap unintended consequences.
What kind of unintended consequences? Groups of mad as hell, pitchfork wielding voters marching to the polls to reinforce Kevin's Grand Delusion with a vengeance? http://tinyurl.com/e3p64
Come on Scott, http://tinyurl.com/9zab4 If the outrageous theft of Willie Jones's property didn't make a ripple way back when, this latest ruling by your Supreme Court isn't going to provoke the herd into anything but predictable mass wankery for the next election cycle.
BTW, you got that business that will protect Bill Von Winkle from the government fired up yet? I'm sure he'd pay well.
Why don't you vote him some protection, Kevin?
Bill Von Winkle now has three choices: Submit, go to jail, or die. His legal options are finished. And still this isn't the straw that will break the camel's back.
But it ought to be.
Thank God your government's got those built in checks and balances.
One of those checks, Lynette, is supposed to be an armed populace. Government officials getting seriously dead for overstepping their power can have a restraining effect. But as I've said on several occasions previously, we failed to take Jefferson's advice and shoot early enough to be effective.
Can we still vote Von Winkle some protection? Possible, but doubtful.
Would Billy Beck's recommendation of mass civil disobedience be effective? Possible, but doubtful.
Here's the thing I've got against you and the rest of the anarcho-capitalist crowd: You don't suggest anything useful yourselves. (Billy's civil disobedience concept is attractive, but doomed by our "cult of material well-being.") You just proclaim it all crap, pay your taxes to stay out of jail, and sit around waiting for the inevitable collapse - all the while hurling insults at anyone who doesn't see the world your way. As someone emailed me tonight; "The thing that is a non-starter for me is the assumption that I am not -- cannot be -- sincere or honest in my position, not to mention the explicit statement that my support for civil courts makes me morally equivalent to Pol Pot. It's the (senseless!) vitriol I cannot stand, and to date I've never met an anarchist of any stripe who could go an entire paragraph without foaming at the mouth."
I don't think it's quite that bad, but check your lips. I think I detect a bit of spittle.
Kevin,
I agree with you wholeheartedly. I've never placed much faith in the material world anyway, since it will always fail you eventually. It's religion, for me, that keeps me going. But nevertheless, this is truly a dark day. And I weep for the next generation, inevitibly more enslaved than me.
I just wish there was something I could do. It is a disgusting feeling to know that the government, and overall, society, is sliding down into the tubes despite one's best efforts. I am powerless.
There must be a better way than just standing alone and letting this happen to us. There HAS to be a better way.
I don't think it's quite that bad, but check your lips. I think I detect a bit of spittle.
That's Perrier, darling.
Perrier. French.
Hmm... I just read the stories of Drega and Heemeyer.
I can support Heemeyer's actions (and find it typical that the media just reported him as a loner nutcase, rather than someone who was repeatedly wronged by selfish businesspeople and bureaucrats), but Carl Drega...
Hmmm.... I can't quite condone his shooting of civil servants, a woman in the back who was trying to run away, and an interloper who wasn't targeting him specifically, but was simply, heroically trying to stop an armed assault.
Property taxes are often based on highest and best use. Compensation should also be. Base the price on the value at the new use not the existing use.
Property taxes are often based on highest and best use.
Best use by whose standards, Walter?
Best by the assessor's standard. I believe this policy was to make someone holding on to property waiting for the value to go up to have to pay tax at market rate rather than at vacant lot value.
Hey, Kev, does anyone know how to get in touch with Mr. Von Winkle so we can organize a sidewalk sit to stop the bulldozers?
The best use should be determined by the person who bought and paid for the land.
Beyond that, trying to squeeze money out of the owner at the point of a gun is purely and simply theft. Condoning it by advocating for government, as Kevin does, constitutes an open invitation to confiscation edicts like Kelo v. New London.
-
I've not blogged in some time because I'm so disheartend by the direction our country is going. This is just another straw in the haystack. I think this picture pretty much sums it up.
http://rschultz.blogspot.com/2005_06_23_RSchultz_archive.html#111957134205191629
Lynette, I advocate for restrained government, which has historically worked - for a while. You advocate for no government, which hasn't historically worked anywhere it's been tried. It keeps getting overwhelmed by unrestrained governments.
What the Kelo, Raich, and McConnell decisions indicate is that the last few restraints are finally failing, and that this system of government is hurtling down the path to destruction. What comes next is anybody's guess, but I'm willing to bet it won't be your an-cap paradise - so I'm wondering why you seen so happy about it? Surely it must be something more than just "I told you so!" preening?
You see the "Just Compensation" part is the kicker to all of this.
In eminent domain cases, the compensation is rarely "just" enough to make up for the economic privation of losing the home. Not to mention the emotional issues of losing one's homestead, forced relocation, etc (pain and suffering in lawsuit-ese).
Why aren't you moving someplace where limited government works?
Name one. It worked here for a while.
You seem to prefer America to the anarchy of Somalia.
I don't know how you can be complaining about the best government in the world. We've always had eminent domain, so obviously it's what made this country great. They don't have emminent domain in Somalia, but I don't see you moving there.
(Sigh.)
We've had eminent domain (supposedly, and often but not always), restricted to public use. That restriction is now gone.
Somalia? The most heavily armed warlord is free to seize any property he cares to by force. There is no organized group of associated others to prevent him, and certainly no tissue of law.
At least here the government (still) gives you warning before opening fire.
Why are we still having this discussion?
This is public use. All use is public because America belongs to We The People. To argue against against government takings is to argue for anarchy.
I repeat: Why are we still having this discussion?
I'm pointing out that the argument that eminent domain produces what you value in America is logically equivalent to your argument that government produces what I like in America.
I remain here because I like the markets here, compromised as they are. The government does not produce these markets any more than eminent domain does. In fact, eminent domain *is* in principle all there is to government.
Do you understand the fallacy of your argument now?
And here I sit blogging about this instead of enlisting people to write their congressional and senatorial folks who hardly ever vote the way the PEOPLE would like; but rather the way that makes their donors happy. I wonder if their will be a revolution given the complacency of the people. I wonder if there will be a revolution because most guns are registered. We are screwed folks. Totally screwed. It's just a matter of time. Unfortunately, I don't think it will happen in our lifetimes. It will certainly happen in the lifetime of my grandchildren and perhaps my children. As Hillary said, we're going to start taking money away from those that have it and give it to those that don't. Redistribution of wealth, a socialized medical system, nobody giving a damned...we're doomed. I should be starting a revolution. I can't speak for you.
"Do you understand the fallacy of your argument now?"
I would ask the same of you. Should our government go really hard-line socialist, will the markets you like still exist here?
John, we've been over this and over this and over this until we should both be blue in the face, or our fingers should be worn down to nubs. The markets you like so much aren't produced by the American government, but they are not strangled by it, either. The American system of government has been the least restrictive form of government ever when it comes to free markets.
However, you and your an-cap compatriots have come up with nothing better.
So sit back, drink a beer or two, and watch the system that's worked better than any other - unfair as it is - decay into something really horrible. Don't lift a finger. Just sneer at those of us who were willing to shove our fingers into the dike, however futile the effort.
Just remember, when it lets go, you get swept away too.
You. Offer. NOTHING.
Not nothing better: NOTHING.
Should our government go really hard-line socialist, will the markets you like still exist here?
If not, that's when I'll leave.
If they let you.
Oh, but while Kennedy's kicking back with that beer, watching as the USA collapses, he'll be able to (rightly) say:
"Told ya so."
And bask in the glow of true anarchy....for exactly as long as it takes the first band of thugs to take over. (but of course they'll be a de facto government, hence proving him all the more right)
I don't believe that's likely to happen in our lifetimes, incidentally. But this most recent SCOTUS decision deeply disturbs me, and I believe it will ultimately cost dozens if not hundreds of lives.
I still believe that it's not too late for civil disobedience to work, but it would have to be MASSIVE.
I still believe that it's not too late for civil disobedience to work, but it would have to be MASSIVE.
Go for it, Mac. Have you started, yet?
-
*sigh*
I keep asking if "we" can work together, and I keep getting the same response, asking what "I" am doing......
Hey, anonymous, what have YOU done? I'd be willing to bet that, outside of a great deal of wailing, moaning and knashing of teeth, it's no more that when I've done.
....and which of the anarchocapitalists are you, anyway?
Bravo on the responses, Kevin.
"Told ya so."
I'm not enjoying what's unfolding, I'm going about my business. What I've been trying to make clear here is that you cannot proceed effectively without coming to grips with the principle by which this is unfolding.
Sergeant Mac stumbled around it right here: "I keep asking if "we" can work together, and I keep getting the same response, asking what "I" am doing......"
The only courses of actions that will be effective are those you can pursue yourself.
http://tinyurl.com/bxyx8
Coordination with others is going to have to be based on more or less immediate self interest. "Let's lie down in front of the bulldozer" or "Let's see if we can outshoot the government" or "Lets all write to congress" are not going to work. If you want others to reliably work to advance your goals you're going to have to offer them something more immediate, like $X an hour.
It's not hopeless at all once you discard the hopeless strategies.
And in whose "immediate self interest" would it be to offer a lot of people "$x an hour"?
Certainly not Bill Gates.
It's the wealthy who get to game the system, John, as you well know.
Trackback message
Title: The Road Not Taken
Excerpt: Unrestricted eminent domain would be unconstitutional. But Kelo demands no such thing. It's pro-Federalist, and bolsters a bit of judicial deference commonly confined to the legal endangered species list. I refuse to assume the sky is falling.
Blog name: No Oil for Pacifists
Bill Gates already does pay a lot of people $X an hour because it's in his immediate self interest. He's done this his whole productive life.
Yes, indeed, John.
But not to fight a bad eminent domain decision. Possibly to get one...
I never suggested he would achieve your goals for you, but if *you* want to achieve *your* goals he's shown you how to organize people to do it.
If what you want produced is actually valuable to people then there's no reason it can't be produced profitably.
"If what you want produced is actually valuable to people then there's no reason it can't be produced profitably."
I guess that explains the roaring success of anarcho-capitalism as a mechanism for producing freedom.
I'm a full-on supporter of property rights. But I think Kelo properly decided--and indistinguishable from Midkiff.
Unrestricted eminent domain would be unconstitutional. But Kelo demands no such thing. The Constitution doesn't compel Federal Courts to substitute their judgment for elected municipal officials.
Kelo is a pro-conservative, pro-Federalism decision that bolsters a bit of judicial deference commonly confined to the legal endangered species list. Not all developers are scum; not every Mayor's on the take--if the are, call the cops and vote against crooked councilmen next November. Isn't that what we tell liberals?:
"[T]he fact remains that state and local governments have a fair amount of power under our constitution to enact either. We often tell folks on the left that not every social ill should be cured by the courts, and that should apply no less when "conservative" interests are at stake."
Connecticut has the right to be socialist--and I have the right not to live in Connecticut.
I'm quite conservative--which is why I'm puzzled that Kelo critics on the Right sound like anti-Wal-Mart kooks. Look to state and municipal government, not federal courts, for redress. And don't assume the sky is falling.
How is leaving the matter to the discretion of local officials a restriction on eminent domain?
Where we disagree, No Oil, is that Midkiff was a proper reading of the 5th Amendment - unanimous or not. It was an expansion of Berman, which was also a bad decision.
As I said, the Court backed itself into a corner. It wasn't going to overturn Midkiff, so it HAD to find against Kelo. The only thing that surprised me, as it surprised you, was that O'Connor wrote such an impassioned dissent, since she wrote Midkiff. "Oh, I didn't mean we should vacate the Takings Clause completely!"
Well I'm heading to www.ammoman.com. When they come for me I know they'll kill me........but I'll take a few of the f$%#ers with me. I guess I'll have to be satisfied with that. Your anarchist whining is sickening. If anarchy is all about the powerful taking what they want with no regard to the law America just became anarchist. Or rather maybe it's been this way for awhile? I hope they come for you anarchists first.
Just no enrichment. Make the developers pay full price. What is full price? A proportionale share of the property after combination.
"I guess that explains the roaring success of anarcho-capitalism as a mechanism for producing freedom."
Kevin? Have you ever in your life read and understood Gresham's Law?
Note: All avatars and any images or other media embedded in comments were hosted on the JS-Kit website and have been lost; references to haloscan comments have been partially automatically remapped, but accuracy is not guaranteed and corrections are solicited.
If you notice any problems with this page or wish to have your home page link updated, please contact John Hardin <jhardin@impsec.org>