Free Capitalist Perspective – Alpine, UT – Does an individual citizen of the United States have a Constitutional “right” to bear arms? 72% of the US public believes so, but few can even articulate a good reason why. Can you? Stop reading for just a second and pick up a pencil and jot down an explanation of your own understanding related to the issue. Answer the question in simple terms. “Does an individual citizen of the United States have a Constitutional “right” to bear arms (own and carry a firearm)?” Then as part two to the assignment answer the question “Why?” or “Why not?” Most Americans are simply not that familiar with the Constitution to “get it right.”

Key Points:

• The text of the 2nd Amendment reads: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
• There is an argument over the meaning of the amendment. Does the “right” belong to a group of citizens – belonging to a well regulated Militia (such as the National Guard) or does the “right’ belong to all individuals?
• The Supreme Court has not ruled on these questions on the 200+ year history of the country. The current case is District of Columbia v. Heller.
• All Circuit Courts to rule so far on the question have found that the right is NOT an individual right.
• The Founders suggested that it was an individual right, as with all rights.
• Consider:

“Many Americans do not even realize that they belong to the militia of their state. They confuse their state militia with the National guard, which is a specialized reserve corps in each state trained at federal expense for immediate service. Under Title 10 [Subtitle A, Part I, Chapter 13, Section 311 paragraph (a)] of the U.S. Code, the militia of each state includes “able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and under 45 years of age who are or have [made] a declaration of intent to become, [citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United STates who are members of the National Guard.” (Skousen, W. Cleon. Making of America. Page 694 – with corrections).

• The biggest disagreement is over the term “the People.” To the Founders this term was generally used to mean the entire collection of individual citizens, “none omitted.” In our day the term has been socialized and is used by the government to mean generally, “the people” in general where specific exclusions are allowable as determined by the Government. This is Karl Marx’s philosophy of social control by “the people” through Government – rendering the term “public” and “the people” to be alternative forms of the word “Government.”
• Many State Constitutions have incorporated the “Right to Bear Arms” but have clarified it as an individual right.

Action Steps:

1. Read Principle 219 in Dr. W. Cleon Skousen’s “Making of America.”
2. Memorize a quote from one of the Founding Fathers related to this discussion to have at your disposal for common discussion.
3. Research what it requires in your State to carry a firearm (concealed or not concealed). Obtain a permit if desired.
4. Contact your Congressional representative and your State Senator’s office to see where they stand on the issue of “individual vs. collective” rights related to firearms.
5. Research your own legal & ethical responsiblities related to being a member (or an eligible member of your family / circle of friends) of the unorganized militia of your State.
6. Contact your Governor’s Office and your State elected officials representing you to identify where they stand on the issue. Prepare a one page summary of what you learn as a result of these action items and mail it to each of these officials in a letter form – requesting their feedback.
7. Create a family and friends quiz on the following questions – research the answers and discuss them with your family/friends after having them take the quiz…
   1. Where in the Constitution of the United States is the individual citizen’s right to bear arms (own and carry firearms and other weapons) protected?
   2. How do we know that this is an individual right rather than a collective right for specific groups like State organized militia such as the National Guard?
   3. Why would the individual citizen in the United States “need” or “want” to own and carry firearms? Isn’t police force the only appropriate place for domestic use of firearms?
   4. What is the actual result of gun control laws in America since the mid 1850s? What is the inherent flaw in these laws?
   5. What is the consequence of disarming the citizenry – short term & long term?
   6. What is the legal definition of the state militia & who are each state’s militia?
   7. How many times has the Supreme Court ruled on the Second Amendment being an individual right of citizens?
   8. What is the difference between the “right to bear arms” in general and owning a particular type of firearm like a hunting rifle, a pistol or a machine gun?
   9. What is currently required in your State if you’d like to have a weapon concealed or unconcealed on your person? In your car?
   10. What is the name of the current case pending before the Supreme Court on the subject?

Free Capitalist Perspective – Apline, UT – There are certain economic concepts that I think most people are just oblivious to. Even worse, we have been trained, taught, and educated to let things we don’t understand about economics just float by our conscious minds with little critical thought at all. For example, I think most people have heard on the radio, watched on the television, or read in the paper reports that the “dollar” is not doing well (an intentional understatement). But I don’t think most people understand what this means for them directly. Specifically, if “dollars follow value” what I don’t think most people are aware of is that the value of the dollar is something that effects every day of their life – and government decisions related thereto should be scrutinized by an alert and educated public. Take for example the Fed’s recent 25 basis point cut at the end of last week. Do you know how this is affecting your life today? Well it is and if you were to become aware of just how this is happening you just might be able to adjust some of your financial decisions to benefit from this knowledge.

Let’s take a look at the article mentioned above.

Key Points:

• Gold struck a record high over the weekend at over $1,015.10 per ounce.
• The US Dollar struck a record low against multiple currencies losing an estimated 2% in value in just one week.
• Fed action like the recent action to “save’ Bear Stearns causes dollar values to drop and commodity values to rise.
• Fed action like lowering the discount rate by 25 basis points causes the value of the dollar to drop.
• The market, not the government sets “real prices” and expresses “real values.”

Summary:

Some people think of the economy as a machine and that the government is its steward. This is a dangerous and naive analogy. The econmy is more like the weather with no stewards over it. Everyone is affected by the economy just like we are all affected by the weather. The economy just like the weather is governed by certain laws or principles. The government cannot change the economy any more than it can change the weather. Oh, there can be slight modifications here and there, and the weather is definitely affected by the actions of humans. However, the weather system is so much larger and influenced by so many factors that it is impossible for one agenda of one person, group or government to control all of these factors so as to predict and control the environment. Besides, even it it were possible (technologically we can conceive of a day when it could be possible to control most variables) it doesn’t make sense. The weather works based upon certain principles so it is always more cost effective and prudent in our preparations to LEARN the principles, LEARN how to predict patterns and results, and ADJUST our behavior (and our plans) accordingly. So, it is with the eoncomy. The economy is “how” people are behaving at any given point in time, and people behave according to what they believe. Importantly, people believe what they do because of perspective. What people see (their perspective) is their experience in life. Their experience in life is governed by principle. So what does this have to do with the Fed, Gold and your savings? Well let me share with you a great quote from Alan Greenspan in 1966.

“In the absence of the gold standard, there is no way to protect savings from confiscation through inflation. There is no safe store of value. If there were, the government would have to make its holdings illegal, as was done in the case of gold. If everyone decided, for example, to convert all his bank deposits to silver or copper or any other good, and thereafter declined to accept checks as payment for goods, bank deposits would lose their purchasing power and government-created bank credit would be worthless as a claim on goods. The financial policy of the welfare state requires that there be no way for the owners of wealth to protect themselves. This is the shabby secret of the welfare statists’ tirades against gold. Deficit spending is simply a scheme for the “hidden” confiscation of wealth. Gold stands in the way of this insidious process. It stands as a protector of property rights. If one grasps this, one has no difficulty in understanding the statists’ antagonism toward the gold standard.”

Action Steps:

1. Read Alan Greenspan’s Gold and Economic Freedom (The Objectivist, July 1966)
2. Research Project: Commit to researching why expanding the money supply or easing credit (lowering cost of money) causes inflation. Write your discoveries in a blog or letter to the editor.
3. Research Project: Commit to researching why the Fed offering credit or financial guarantees to a corporation such as Bear Stearns generally causes stock prices to fall and what affect falling stock prices has on the value of the dollar. Write your discoveries in a blog or letter to the editor.
4. Research Project: Commit to researching what the relationship is between the “price” or “value” of the dollar and the “price” or “value” of gold. Write your discoveries in a blog or letter to the editor.

Free Capitalist Perspective – Alpine, UT – I remember as a kid being told about the “Great Depression” and how the banks had collapsed and the government had to come in and bail everyone out. I remember hearing about how FDR had saved America, etc. I had no idea then, how tainted my perspective was based upon the politicizing that had gone on for generations about what had actually happened. Similarly, I’m not sure how many Americans are paying attention today to what is actually happening right before their eyes. For certainly what is happening today will be the source of stories told to children for generations. 2008 is likely the year for the economic earthquake so oft predicted by economic thinkers for the last decade. I’m not kidding, exaggerating, nor do I think I’m a “doomsday-er.” But, one thing I also am not is a pretender, and people who are pretending that this is just a “tough spot” and that “America will work through this” are downplaying the realities of the present situation. The effect that this pretending is having on average citizens is that they stay asleep. It’s time my friends, to wake up and prepare. Actually, it’s past time for some of the most important preparation but it’s not too late for those who are anxious, willing, and committed to getting their house in order – quickly.

In order to grasp what’s “really” going on, one needs to simply pay attention to the financial news. Take for example the news story about J.P. Morgan and Bear Stearns.

Overview:

Bear Stearns is one of the largest global investment banks and securities trading firms in the world. Its primary clients are corporations, institutions, governments and high net worth individuals. Between 2005 and 2007 the firm was widely recognized as one of the “Most Admired” firms in Fortune magazine’s “America’s Most Admired Companies” survey.

While anyone can read the headlines, most average folks just have no idea how this company might affect them personally. One of the major investments of Bear Stearns has been mortgage backed securities. Or in other words, when you get a mortgage from a normal bank – they probably sell that mortgage to someone with more money than they have. The “asset” that they are selling is your promise to pay. Your promise is collateralized by the value of your home. Bear Stearns was highly invested in this section of the market. This means that many governments and corporations had substantial portions of their portfolio depending upon the performance of Bear Stearn’s investment in this area. With the real estate crisis, the mortgage/credit crisis, and the collapse of the sub-prime mortgage industry Bear Stearns was unable to maintain a substantial degree of liquidity of its investments. To make it more simple, they would put money in, but could not get money out of their investments. This means that they can’t pay their bills, can’t pay investors, etc. It basically means they can’t operate. Now, I’m not exaggerating. On March 10, 2008 the company denied it had cash liquidity problems, but on March 14, 2008 the AP reported that JP Morgan Chase, in conjunction with the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, would provide temporary funding because “its liquidity significantly deteriorated over the past day.” So, in a nut shell, the company has no cash but has huge obligations to major corporations and governments across the globe. If the company were to just close its doors besides the catastrophic loss to its investors the affect would ripple across the industry causing other investors in similar companies to want to pull out (a.k.a. “run on the bank”) because of fears similar things may happen to them. So, the Federal Reserve steps in and provides the cash needed to run the business for 28 days. But, the situation is even worse. 28 days from now is about April 11th. Look for more shocking developments in the financial sector as this loan comes due.

Now, let’s look at a few main points in the article.

Key Points:

• In January 2007 shares in Bear Stearns traded as high as $170. Today the stock is trading at just over $4.
• Basically the entire portfolio value of this stock has been eliminated overnight. This is far worse than any real estate depreciation.
• JP Morgan has offered to buy the company for pennies on the dollar ($236 million) when the company was estimated to be worth $3.54 billion.
• Why would JP Morgan be buying? Are they dumb? What are you doing?

“Government regulators, including Federal Reserve and the Office of he Comptroller of the Currency, having given their blessing to the transaction.”

• Isn’t it interesting that the Federal Reserve employees are considered “government regulators?”
• Also, isn’t it interesting how quickly the government can give its approval in a situation like this.

“Still, unwinding Bear Stearns could be a nightmare because of the plethora of Wall Street firms with which it has dealings.”

• Self interest: who has self-interest in keeping this entity from collapsing entirely?

“Meanwhile, worries are deepening that other securities firms and commercial banks might be on shaky ground. Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. Chief Executive Richard Fuld, concerned about the markets and possible fallout from Bear Stearn’s troubles, cut short a trip to India and returned home Sunday, ahead of schedule, according to people familiar with the matter. The decision came after a series of calls Saturday to both senior executives at the firm and Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, these people say. Investors’ concerns that the flight of worried Bear Stearns customers last week might spread to other firms is likely to make for a tense opening today on Wall Street. Yesterday, Mr. Paulson said in a TV interview that the government “would do what it takes” to protect the integrity of the financial system. On several occasions over the weekend, Mr. Paulson spoke about the Bear Stearns negotiations with Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke and New York Federal Reserve Bank President Timothy Geithner, according to people familiar with the matter.”

• Is this a private company or a public company ? (remember “public” these days means “government”).
• Where is the government when small business America is having “liquidity problems.” Is it principle or expediency?
• How is JP Morgan benefited? Compare this to Iraq war rhetoric in February of 2003.
• Is the integrity of the “financial system” built upon one company?

“One of Bear’s biggest attractions for J.P. Morgan is its prime brokerage business which caters to hedge fund clients. J.P. Morgan doesn’t have such a business and executives there have long said that they would like to add those operations to the bank’s portfolio…Over time, Bear Stearns’s misfortune could bear fruit for J.P. Morgan. Bear Stearns’s investment-banking unit, which underwrites stocks and bonds and advises on mergers, and its fixed-income and capital-markets trading businesses have been badly bruised by the credit crunch but still have some value.”

• Do you think that the government is protecting you? Or perhaps someone else?
• When “Banks” collapse, it is a public sales job for government / corporate action that is essentially a corporate redistribution of wealth.
• Would “Banks” fail in the unregulated marketplace? What would that look like?

Action Steps:

1. Research your own portfolio. Do you have a 401(k) or other fund based investment? Find out which companies are central to your funds performance.
2. Are you buying high and selling low or are you buying low and selling high? Research investment options for “wholesale buying.” Use your own pretend dollars and practice trading in situations like this – there is much more to come.
3. Are you holding “cash” as investments where the “liquidity” of the cash is controlled by someone else? Consider what options you might have to convert your cash based investments to commodity based investments.
4. At times like this, the public is being sold fear and insecurity to justify government intervention, most want to withdrawl in scarcity from the market. Fight scarcity by creating a master-mind group with licensed financial advisers, experts, friends, family members etc., and brainstorm how you might “benefit” from the current situation.
5. Keep your brain on, and keep reading.
6. Commodities, gold, commodities, silver, commodities, commodities, commodities. Did I say commodities?

Everyone like to talk about the economy these days but very few people have the gravitas and credibility to send out warnings to the general public like those now rolling out almost daily. While wanna be experts and pundits through out casual references and sensational warnings about America’s current economic woes seldom have institutional voices been so dramatic in their assessments. That is until recently when Telegraph writer Abrose Evans-Pritchard has published a series of startling stories about the criticism and warnings now coming from inside “the close-knit world of central banking.” In a stunning interview with 92 year old Anna Schwartz the Telegraph probes the shocking revelation by a revered figure at the Fed that

the central bank itself is the chief cause of the credit bubble, and now seems stunned as the consequences of its on actions engulf the financial system. Ms. Schwartz, the revered economist and co-author with Nobel laureate Milton Friedman: A Monetary History of the United States, has taken to chastising and rebuke. And according to Evans-Prichard, as far as rebukes go few are as credible and effective as “the scathing indictment of US Federal Reserve policy by Professor Anna Schwartz.”

The new group at the Fed is not equal to the problem that faces it…They need to speak frankly to the market and acknowledge how bad the problems are, and acknowledge their won failures in letting this happen. This is what is needed to restore confidence…There never would have been a sub-prime mortgage crisis if the Fed had been alert. This is something Alan Greenspan must answer for.”

Professor Schwartz and the late Milton Friedman revolutionized thinking on the causes of the Great Depression in 1965 with their bombshell publication convincingly persuading Americans high and low that it was not the much maligned free-market system that had failed in the 1930′s but instead that it was “incompetent government bureaucrats at the Fed” who bore responsibility for the financial crisis. In the second article referenced above Evans-Pritchard hypothisis along the lines of what Free Capitalist radio listeners have been hearing for over a year now, that the present “crisis may make 1929 look like a walk in the park.”

Key Points:

• It took Friedman and Schwartz, 30 years later, to unmask the real culprit that caused the Great Depression (incompetent bureaucrats).
• The false theory advocated by the bureaucrats and politicians was that it was the “free market, unscrupulous capitalists, and speculating investors” that caused the Depression.
• Despite Friedman and Schwarts seminal work, the false theory is still advanced, taught and believed by American BOC culture today. This has made Americas vulnerable.
• Today’s bureaucrats and politicians are up to the same old tricks, blaming freedom, entrepreneurs and investors. See Yaron Brook’s “The Morality of Moneylending: A Short History”
• When a speculative home borrower loses a home to foreclosure, that is the “punishment” from the marketplace. Losing liberty is far more subtle.
• Laws that make “lenders” more responsible for borrowers decisions cannot increase productivity and therefore credit extensions will tighten and the market worsen

Lawmakers have recently started down the path to make it illegal for lenders to make loans where the borrower does not have “the reasonable ability to repay the loan.” However, this puts the lender in a sticky situation. Who decides, for the borrower, if he has the reasonable ability to repay the loan. Without defining key “terms” like this legislation contemplates the formula sets the stage for bureaucrats to decide arbitrarily and this makes the lenders more cautious. Credit tightens. However, the Fed is pumping more money into the market. So, excess supply of money (means cheap dollars), no or substantially less new lending means lower velocity of money (lower productivity).

Conclusion:

Alert and educated citizens should be aware of the storyline endlessly defended by bureaucrats and politicians and be on the lookout for attempts to blame our economic problems on everyone except those who were elected and those who were hired to manage the affairs of the government. Productivity not legislation or bureaucratic involvement is how America will recover from potentially the worse economic crisis in modern history. Those who keep their efforts focused on productivity will be well situated, those who do not will be consigned to telling victim stories.

Action Steps:

1. Read Yaron Brook’s “Morality of Money Lending” essay.
2. Read current Fed Chairman Ben S. Bernake’s address at Milton Friedman’s Ninetieth Birthday conference where he openly agrees with Freidman that the Fed caused the Great Depression.
3. Have a family council discussion about productivity. Openly brainstorm how your family can focus on productive, revenue creating activity.
4. Speak openly, even write letters to the editor or post online in opposition to government based solutions that seek to soften the impact of unwise borrowing.
5. Contact your Congressman or Senator’s office and make your position known about government intervention and incompetent bureaucrats being entrusted with more power.
6. Research & identify private capital alternatives as sources for items such as home purchases, car purchases, student loans, etc.
7. Consider alternatives to holding “cash” based long term investments, seek advice from a competent financial professional who understands proven principles of wealth and productivity.
8. Avoid speculation, avoid fear mongering, avoid panic -by staying informed and actively engaging in the marketplace in sound, principle based investments that are creating value for those who have been unwise in the easy money market of the late ’90s and early 2000s.
9. Commodities, gold, commodities, silver, commodities, commodities, commodities. Did I say commodities?

For the last several years it has becoming increasingly clear that many of the elected officials in Washington D.C. are not happy about what is happening in the marketplace, especially with talk radio. After years of failed attempts to find “more suitable” talkers to fill the airwaves (most shows have simply gone broke and were unable to entice programmers to continue) lawmakers are increasingly bringing up the subject of resurrecting a 20 year-old relic of failed socialization of the airwaves.
This article reports on President Bush’s recent comments to the National Religious Broadcasters Convention.

“The very first amendment to our Constitution include the freedom of speech and the freedom of religion. Founders believed these unalienable rights were endowed to us by our Creator. They are vital to a healthy democracy, and we must never let anyone take those freedoms away. I mention this because there’s an effort afoot that would jeopardize your right to express your views on public airways. Some members of Congress want to reinstate a regulation that was repealed 20 years ago. It has the Orwellian name called the Fairness Doctrine. Supporters of this regulation say we need to mandate that nay discussion of so-called controversial issues on the public airwaves includes equal time for all sides.”

Key Points:

• Radio Broadcasting is already heavily regulated, with licenses (government permission slips) themselves being worth millions.
• Talk Radio as we know it did not exist BECAUSE of regulation 20 years ago.
• Radio station owners and broadcasters are self-interested and seek a profit.
• There are no “public” airwaves, their are government controlled airwaves. This is part of the problem. How the American people have tolerated government “owning” the airwaves for the people is mind boggling.
• Who decides if “all” sides of an issue are “adequately” represented. Do all “issues” have discernible sides?

Commentary:

Tribe mentality aka collectivism sees contradictory ideas as threats, their expression as assault, and force as the remedy. Persuasion is not in the mental conceptual framework of brain-off, emotionally driven lawmakers who want to “make everything fair.” Of course, they don’t have the faintest idea of what fair is. “Fair” to a collectivist means getting what they want. This is what the legislation is all about.

There is no real chance of the “fairness doctrine” coming back today, but it could happen in the near future. More than likely this is a political threat to certain broadcasters to carry more “liberal” talk shows that are desirable in the minds of certain lawmakers. The threatened financial burden on broadcasters just to lobby against the legislation is enough to change radio.

Conclusion:

President Bush’s rhetoric is nice, but the real problem here is that the FCC and congress have any control over the speech on the airwaves. Additionally, his worn out reference to the “public airwaves” is insulting to free men and women who know that this is simply modern vernacular for “government airwaves.” Thank goodness for talk radio, thank goodness for talk radio listeners.

Even conservatives get this one wrong. Its not just that the idea of the “fairness doctrine” is wrong, the government’s approach to the entire subject of broadcasting is wrong. There is no fairness in letting government bureaucrats decide what is fair speech content in any medium. Productivity, and it alone is the standard for business survival.

Recently I had a government regulator suggest that if I wanted his highly questionable, oppressive and likely illegal tactics to end, I should stop criticizing the government on the radio. Of course, this is the purpose of political speech and mediums such as broadcast, print, film, etc. Should we have a “fairness” doctrine for movies and magazines and newspapers and while we’re at it – would these same lawmakers suggest that we have a fairness doctrine in elections – making sure there is always an opponent to their re-election representing every side of every issue?

Action Steps:

1. Read Ayn Rand’s 1964 Essay, “The Property Status of Airwaves.”
2. Listen to more talk radio. Refer your friends.
3. If you are interested, post your opinion online, and while you do realize that some commissar (commie-czar) might be advocating in the near future that you ought not to be able to do that unless your adversaries are given equal time and access.

It is becoming more and more common to see stories like this. Parents being attacked by government agencies for choosing not to vaccinate their children. Independent of the merits of their choice, contrary to the conversations that usually ensue when this subject is discussed, to the “Brain-On” Free Capitalist the real issue is the proper role of government and the use of force in civil society.

This story is about parents in Belgium refusing the polio vaccine. On one side is the government and medical establishment, “The Belgians have a right to take some action against the parents, given the seriousness of polio, but the question is, is a prison sentence disproportionate?” The other side: the hard line ‘thought leaders’ arguing, “Nobody has the right to unfettered liberty, and people do not have a right to endanger their kids (FC Aside: unless you work for the government). What’s missing? The parents, any comments representing their choice, anyone being asked about the larger issues of health, parental choice, child welfare from a parent’s perspective, etc.

There are bigger issues at stake in this story, they too are omitted.

Key Points:

• Only 1,000 cases of polio are reported world wide. (Source: CDC/WHO)
• In Belgium, Dr. Victor Lusayu (head of Belgium’s international vaccine centre) claims that polio has been entirely eliminated from Europe. (Source: Cheng Article)
• In the US, all cases of paralytic polio since 1979 have been caused by the oral polio vaccine. (Source: DHPE)
• In the last 10 years, “vaccine caused” outbreaks have occurred in Nigeria, Dominican Reublic, Haiti, Phillippines, Madagascar, China and Indonesia. (Source: AP)
• It appears that the only substantial cause of polio in the civilized world is now – the vaccination.
• Dr. David Heymann, the World Health Organization’s top polio official admits, “It would be nice if we had a more stable oral polio vaccine, but that’s not the way it is today.
• Despite the emotional content this issue is not about whether or not its a good idea to have children vaccinated. that is a separate discussion. The issue is whether or not the government ought to be authorized to use force to override a parents choice for their children.
• Parents have self-interest in their children’s well being. Certainly no government bureaucracy is going to have more self-interest in children than parents. Government workers don’t get some magic new formula for wisdom and sound decision making just because they get a paycheck from the government.
• The marketplace of ideas cannot be controlled by force. Freedom and liberty made it possible for the discovery, development and implementation of the vaccine 50 years ago – there was no “law” required.
• Health professionals admit they “want” a better vaccine, but if you are in the business of producing the current vaccine, what is your motivation to innovate, take risks, etc., when its a criminal offense not to buy your product?

Commentary:

It may be a good idea or a bad idea to have your child vaccinated, but it is certainly an unprincipled and therefore bad idea to empower the government (any government) to use force to compel parents to inject a dangerous disease into the body of their child. The only defense of the ‘tribalist’ mentality (which always argues that individual choice is dangerous to the public – as if the public is something besides the aggregate of individuals) is that the government “knows better” how to care for children. While this may be the case in a few isolated circumstances, it is certainly not the case in general and the law does not and cannot exercise rational judgment – only people can, and the people most interested in the health and well-being of children are their parents.

Conclusion:

Should the government encourage awareness? Sure. Promote education, yes. Provide protection of individual civil rights? That is the less obvious implication of the issue – but the answer is obviously, “of course.” Oh, by the way, if you were in charge of selling the polio vaccine – do you think you could sell a lot or a little in the “free” market? It seems to me it would be like selling shoes, pencils, shirts, towels, hammers, nails, or even cell phones – not exactly a hard sell. To a well trained participant in the BOC – thoughts like these never come to mind. To the BOC, no law requiring vaccine’s means instant mass stupidity, rapid disease spread, and the abandonment of reason and self-interest.

The Point:

It’s not about polio. It’s not about vaccines. It’s not even about parental choice (though that’s close). This issue is about liberty and the proper role of government. Government is force, and force is only rightly used to protect rights, not to advance social change.

The tools of a Free Capitalist are persuasion, long suffering, ingenuity, innovation, vision and often patients. The socialists draw the gun, point it at your head and give ultimatums where their view is challenged. In which camp are you?

Action Steps:

1. Research the legal requirements for vaccinations in your community / state. Identify your options.
2. Identify individuals or groups in your community concerned about the issue. Learn their positions.
3. Discuss the issue with interested community members, your State Representative and/or State Senator.
4. Post your opinion online or write a letter to the editor of your statewide newspaper.
5. Discuss the issue and your legal options with your spouse and mature children. Decide in advance how you will respond if this becomes an issue that ever directly affects you and your family.
6. Suggest a Community Action Item to your local Free Capitalist Community Council.
7. If appropriate, suggest an amendment (in writing in detail) to the existing law to your state legislature.
8. Calendar a time to review / revisit the news on this issue in 90-days.
9. Keep your brain on, ideas flowing, and remain engaged in your community.
10. Email your friends and associates about your thoughts and planned action items.