Tag Archives: Leninism

Tom Woods – War: Big Government’s Best Friend

This is a good one.


Murray Rothbard – Left, Right, and the Prospects for Liberty

Very good read.

Pdf here.

Murray Rothbard – The Ethics of Liberty

Murray Rothbard – The Ethics of Liberty.

More Murray Rothbard.

Even more Murray Rothbard.



This really exposes to me the tragedy of the state, and the objectivity of freedom. And it also depresses me, because I feel like long-lasting change is hopeless. The pendulum will always swing back towards despotism.

This book should change your life. If it doesn’t, then there is something wrong with you.

Sadly, I believe that most of the content in this book is just going to fly over the heads of most readers. So I’m only posting this with the hope that some people get it. And also because I myself enjoyed the book.

This man makes me want to become even more strenuous in my own writing; finding as many absolute truths as possible to understand and disseminate in my own life.

To call this work “thought-provoking” is an understatement.

This book is a challenging read: “challenging” in the sense that it challenges many ideas that appear almost unbreakable in today’s world. It is “radical” in that it is a minority, if not non-existent, idea in today’s world. But it shines like a glistening gem, contrasted with the muck that is popular today. I don’t know what hope there is in the future, but at least I can understand for myself what realities are out there and find internal peace for them, even if ultimately, its truths are not realized by “the public”, and thus do not come to fruition, and I have my own personal reasons for not wanting to be a “teacher” to individuals.

Murray Rothbard – Egalitarianism as a Revolt Against Nature, and Other Essays

This is a magnificent read.

PLEASE read it.

The horror of evil is its perpetual nature and hopelessness-inducing, but thankfully, there are moments when people rise above this monotony of horror and retain and express objectivities.

The hopelessness often overtakes me, and thus I search for things which I happened to find in this book.

It provides me with a sense of hope, that life is more than pop culture, and that history has provided us with ideas that will be eternally relevant (at least until Christ comes back), but it also provides me with a sense of hopelessness in that even though objectivity his historical, and will always continue to be, its opposite will be as well, meaning that evil will always attribute the good until, once again, Christ comes back.

This conflict is at the root of human existence, with man being constantly pulled between joy and misery, and it is the perpetual natures of objectivities and fallacies which pull me everwhichaway between happiness and hopelessness.

I can only pray for that eternal resolution of happiness that God has promised me, accepting the fact that I will inevitably doubt along the way, but that faith ultimately triumphs, with bliss being its result, with all of the various roadblocks that the conflict will inevitably entail, including the inevitable sorrow that must accompany the road to eternal bliss (although the sorrow does not create the bliss, as some people pervertedly believe).

I have seen the trends in the later parts of this book all too well, and if I were a little bit more foolish, I would’ve succomb to their various evils. However, I have been able to recognize them, although this has obviously caused rifts between myself and those victims of the phenomenons which are discussed in the latter part of this book. The attacks are discouraging, but intelligence is the only way to figure out objective truths, and, I suppose as the main point of this piece is, if there are differences of intelligences among individuals, then sobeit, and if that means that some people must become victims of some of the ideologies discussed in the latter part of this book, sobeit as well, despite how destructive and depressing it may be.

As I have said before, there simply is no process as difficult to humanity as changing the mind of another: man can create stars more easily than changing the minds of others.

So, as for what I am going to do with all of this information, I am going to continue studying economics for my own material well-being, I will continue to learn objective truths as much as possible, I will no doubt more than likely continue to be depressed at the trends in the latter part of this book continuing, I will write, I will study, I will entertain, and I will attempt to become wealthy because of all of the above, with the studying being more prevalent than anything else, and with the desire for wealth being right behind my desire to learn.

My own personal individuality will have to avoid as many evils and illogicalities as possible, and that will no doubt be difficult for me, but it shall be the only thing that I can truly do while I am here alive on the Earth.

capitalisminstitute.org – The Simple Reason Socialism Always Fails

Modern sociology is essentially based on the teachings of Karl Marx. Few people mention the man with such reverence as a professor teaching how societies interact, evolve, and function. In a typical sociology classroom, the students and professor will learn about class warfare, economics, the survival of the fittest, as well as plenty of examples where the rich are “exploiting” the poor.

Karl Marx is considered the intellectual godfather of hundreds of thousands of professors, intellectuals, elitists, and anti-capitalists. He invented what’s known as the “Conflict Theory”, the notion that change occurs because of conflict between two groups of people. He was right about that, but he was hideously, deadly wrong about how he applied it.

Marx saw political conflict — people using resources and force to enslave other people — and he concluded that it wasn’t the use of force that was wrong, but the existence of capital. It’s a completely incoherent logical leap, and it had grave consequences for the rest of humanity.

Missing the Point With The Communist Manifesto

Karl Marx’s infamous “The Communist Manifesto” is the most important document he wrote, because it was the intellectual rallying cry of anti-capitalists everywhere.

It was the justification for confiscating trillions of dollars worth of property and then mismanaging it in the most incompetent economic planning the world has ever seen.

It was the justification for public executions of capitalists — people like myself, who own and use capital to produce even more.

Hundreds of millions of capitalists were murdered because of Marx’s philosophy. Families were wiped out, husbands were hanged, children made orphans, economies destroyed, and during the Cold War, the world itself almost met its fiery end due to the insane delusions of equality by the power-greedy communists.

In this document, Marx wrote the following:

“Let the ruling classes tremble at a Communist revolution. The proletarians have nothing to lose but their chains. They have a world to win. Working men of all countries, unite!”

What laughable insanity. This man of a giant beard and a small mind referenced power as the reason the poor were “victims”, and yet his response wasn’t the downfall of the ruling classes — it was taking political inequality and unleashing it in a manner the world had never seen before.

Consolidating power to the state doesn’t end inequality — consolidating power fosters inequality. Not all men are free to rule their neighbors, because that is outlawed under socialist dogma. Under socialism, a handful of men determine the rules, the economic planning, and the rations that the rest of the “workers” will receive.

The end-goal, socialists argue, is a society where power isn’t necessary. But to get there, they explain, we need to consolidate power in a socialist economy. A handful of men need to be given the power to decide what to do with everyone’s property, what ideas can be discussed, what lives can be ended, and what freedoms must be deleted for the sake of the eventual “common good”.

Learn the Lessons of History

Anyone who understands human nature sees the flaw here. Men abuse; absolute power tends to the abuse of power. But instead of people trying to manipulate others with money and resources through marketing, they created a society where negotiation began and ended with force — violence, prisons, executions, starvation.

The greatest source of inequality in the 20th century was socialism itself.

The greatest cause of poverty in the 20th century was socialism itself.

The greatest catalyst for exploitation in the 20th century was socialism itself.

They realized that the “ruling class” was wrecking havoc on society, and then concluded that it wasn’t the power — it was the money itself. The irony of such a misplaced philosophy and a self-defeating movement would be humorous if it hadn’t wrecked havoc with an evil the world had never seen before.

Let the ruling classes tremble? They tremble in excitement because they will be the ones who control your socialist empire.

Nothing to lose but your chains? Communism enslaves billions. Nothing to lose? Except your families to starvation, your friends to execution, your material well-being through rationing, and your freedom itself.

Working men of all countries? We have no time for angry and violent riots — we are carrying your world on our shoulders.

The Real Conflict is: Liberty Vs. Slavery

Marx was right about one thing: social movement occurs from perceived class conflict. The poor are progressively becoming more and more socialistic in America, not because the rich are harming them, but because they perceive the world as being owned, controlled, and regulated by a handful of the super rich — even though this is economically, historically, and politically inaccurate.

No one will ever argue that some of the rich do not abuse their wealth with regulations, bailouts, and subsidies — but the problem isn’t the existence of capital; the problem is political force itself.

For example, I am a capitalist. I take my wealth and multiply it through leverage, business projects, and other endeavors. I will not, however, use my money to manipulate the system in order to destroy other businesses. I will not take my money to manipulate the economy so I get an advantage over others.

Other companies, like Wal-Mart and Microsoft, almost always utilize their wealth to buy politicians in order to take down their competitors. This is not a flaw of capitalism — this is a flaw of corruption. It is not a flaw of freedom when someone abandons it — that is a definitional impossibility and a self-defeating concept.

The root of all social evil is unwarranted force — the violation of the rights of others. Murder, theft, rape, war — these are the things of evil. The free market doesn’t include any of these concepts. Once we understand this, all else follows, and we’ll soon come to realize that capitalism is the only moral economic system that protects and respects the rights of all men — regardless of their class.