I don’t think Bastiat could ever have imagined this world from his pov in the 1800s but his writing about “a regulation of labor imposed by force” as a violation of liberty is poignant if we take a moment to consider financial pressures as that ‘force’. is it possible to see other countries economies as that force that violates our liberty to live well? even the current insane oil speculation could be seen in that light without too stretching too far the analogy.

all issues seem to stem from the illusion of separation of state and people, as if they are ‘them’ and we are ‘us’ and until people take back that responsibility and ownership and operate through government rather than be acted up by it then we’ll always have the carousel of madness. personally i am enjoying the effect of barack obama to at least provoke a stirring, true he is using a broken system but it could serve to waken some in the future to a more integrated personal government of life.

interesting post, thanks for sharing!

So I’m not sure which way this cuts for Obama. It’s probably just hyperbole that most politicians are famous for.

I doubt Obama really believes his tripe. He just knows it resonates with sometimes gullible voters. If his contentions were correct, sub-Saharan Africa would be the most wealthy region of the earth, and the most remote tribes in the world that have little technology and don’t trade with anyone else would enjoy the highest standard of living in the world.

Perhaps the most amusing part of Obama’s statements is that he draws so much support from the netroots. It’s almost like biting the hand that feeds him, you know?

Reminds me of Ronald Reagan’s quip: “The nine most terrifying words in the English language are :’I'm from the government and I’m here to help’”.

When Johann Gutenberg invented the printing press in 1450 there were actually many people who resisted his invention. In his book The Reformation, historian Will Durant writes, “…not all welcomed [the printing press]. Copyists protested that printing would destroy their means of livelihood; aristocrats opposed it as a mechanical vulgarization, and feared that it would lower the value of their manuscript libraries; statesmen and clergy distrusted it as a possible vehicle of subversive ideas.”

Even the PRINTING PRESS, if you can imagine, was resisted on the same grounds, that people would lose jobs! Yet can we even quantify the amount of jobs that it actually created in the long-run? It spawned entire industries that had never existed before.

It’s so self-evident that it’s even tiresome to keep pointing it out. But I suppose someone has to do it.

By the way, Curtis, I also think there are virtues in living off the land by the sweat of our brow. I’d like to learn to do more of that, myself. But government policy that encourages or subsidizes a move in that direction is foolhardy. A man who serves his fellows through his work and is also able to rely on his own labors for subsistence is a wise man indeed, worthy of emulation.

For example, using it to advance the Lord’s work has been crucial. So said Howard W. Hunter:

In recent years we have begun using information technology to hasten the sacred work of providing ordinances for the deceased. The role of technology in this work has been accelerated by the Lord himself, who has had a guiding hand in its development and will continue to do so. However, we stand only on the threshold of what we can do with these tools. I feel that our most enthusiastic projections can capture only a tiny glimpse of how these tools can help us—and of the eternal consequences of these efforts. (Howard W. Hunter, via Quoty)