Hi,
So I know that a number of posts have floated around before talking about "which country is the most austrian/libertarian?" However, I don't remember anyone posting the country Andorra. It's a small country in between France and Spain with less than 1% of their population employed by the public sector. They've been independent since the 1200's and have an extremely high standard of living.
I'm wondering what you guys think? What am I missing here?
--Eric
Given its position between Spain and Andorra, the economy is extremely dependent on these two states and the government has been under a lot of pressure to reform their tax system since it is considered a tax haven. Given this political pressure, I'm not sure for how much longer Andorra's banking system will continue to be lucrative.
Thanks for the quick reply.
I agree with your comments about location, and I would also add that Andorra is highly import dependent. Only a small portion of it's land is arable, with the most lucrative use being tobacco. However, since a true free society (ie: Rothbard's self ownership and just property titles) does not exist, I wonder what country would be the best candidate to enact these ideals?
Andorra historically has had no interest in being a formal member of the EU, and from what I read now, that stance is not likely to change. I guess the question we should be asking ourselves is:
1) is it better than the US?
2) if so, by how much?
Jonathan M. F. Catalán: .
.
I know/knew almost nothing about Andorra, and Wikipedia tells me they speak 'Catalan'. What are the odds!!?
Ha, a fact in it of itself which is very cool! I have heard only good things about that language.
ebrigham: Ha, a fact in it of itself which is very cool! I have heard only good things about that language.
I have a Basque friend that says otherwise. But he is a socialist, so what does he know
ebrigham: Hi, So I know that a number of posts have floated around before talking about "which country is the most austrian/libertarian?" However, I don't remember anyone posting the country Andorra. It's a small country in between France and Spain with less than 1% of their population employed by the public sector. They've been independent since the 1200's and have an extremely high standard of living. I'm wondering what you guys think? What am I missing here? --Eric
If people believe in the state, there will be a state. Where there is a state, there cannot be unhampered liberty. Since this is as true at any scale (national, local, global), there is no hope for liberty anywhere until the state is broken everywhere. This means that people throughout the world must begin to see Leviathan for what it is, a morass of justifications and rationalizations for criminal behavior on the part of specially-designated persons acting on behalf of usually unknown interests. As long as people love their governments and believe that "it's our social duty to pay taxes" and so on, there will be no haven for liberty anywhere on the globe (unless you're super-wealthy and politically connected, in which case, the world is your playground and we are your slaves).
Clayton -
I could not agree with you more. In fact your arguments themselves are very Rothbardian. However, that does not rule out the concept of strategy. As Rothbard put it, the strategy that would reach our ultimate goal of liberty in the shortest amount of time. That being said, I wonder whether "homebase" for implementing such a strategy should be the US (public sector soon to be 50% of the work force) or some other smaller state where it is more conceivable to eliminate it in a shorter amount of time. Thoughts?
Unfortunately I am not super-wealthy (yet), so I must actually think about this strategically :).
ebrigham: Clayton - I could not agree with you more. In fact your arguments themselves are very Rothbardian. However, that does not rule out the concept of strategy. As Rothbard put it, the strategy that would reach our ultimate goal of liberty in the shortest amount of time. That being said, I wonder whether "homebase" for implementing such a strategy should be the US (public sector soon to be 50% of the work force) or some other smaller state where it is more conceivable to eliminate it in a shorter amount of time. Thoughts? Unfortunately I am not super-wealthy (yet), so I must actually think about this strategically :). --Eric
Well, the only sense in which we need a "home base" is that we need a New Vienna, we need a cultural center of scholars of liberty to emerge and begin rebuilding the edifice of liberalism which has been in disrepair for the better part of a century. As encouraged as I am by the work of LvMI, I'm not sure that Auburn, AL is going to be the New Vienna that we need. Yes, the internet alleviates the need for a central place of scholarship but it is my view that even in the digital age, locality matters.
Also, we need to embrace liberty in every culture. Please do not mistake this for cheap, statist multi-culturalism of the "desegregation" variety. The enemies of freedom in the United States have attempted to force every culture in the world onto Americans except American culture exactly in order to destroy liberty, American culture being the first to self-consciously adopt the mantle of liberalism and natural rights as among its highest values. But as the world has shrunk due to advances in the technologies of travel and communication, liberty cannot be protected if it is championed by just one culture. Western culture is not the only culture to advance liberal ideals but it was the most vociferous proponent of liberal ideals recently ("recently" on a century timescale). Rather than thinking of this in terms of "winning converts", I think we need individuals from all the great cultures of the world to take interest in liberalism and find a historical and cultural foundation for liberalism within their own culture. Freedom is, after all, the state of nature. It is already present in every culture, the key is for each culture to find its own way out of the maze of statism.
I'm skeptical that liberty can be evangelized. Those who are content with the status quo are energized against liberty when they hear others discuss it. And those who are discontent with the status quo go looking for answers without prodding. I think that people will naturally turn to the ideas of liberty as they suffer under ever-increasing oppression and as those ideas become more available through the technology of the internet and the consequent commoditization of all forms of media. I think that the LvMI is the ultimate expression of Rothbard's strategy and has been immensely facilitated by the internet. But for the non-scholar, I think the strategy has to be more practical. I don't think attending rallies or handing out pamphlets can make a difference. Look at the history of revolutions and pamphleteering. You cannot compete with those who are motivated by the expectation of capturing the coercive apparatus of the state. You are only trying to secure your own liberty, not turn the ship of state to the end of coercing others for your benefit. People act with energy in proportion to the intensity of their interests. Instead, we must look more deeply at how individuals pursuing their own security from the state and prosperity despite the state can, without even intending to, bring down the state. I think there's still quite a bit of discussion in this area to be had.
1) New Vienna -- I totally agree. Although I'm excited to attend MisesU this July, I don't see myself moving to Auburn, AL any time soon. The same could be said for New Hampshire (I've read that libertarians are trying to congregate there). Definitely something needs to be done to address these issues.
2) Global Liberty -- the natural laws that we are advocating be upheld are universal and extend well beyond the borders of our actual communities. I also think there is a lot that we can learn from other cultures (and data to be gathered) as we pursue our ideal.
3) Liberty Evangelism -- you hit the nail on the head. I think at this point people have such a limited attention span that evangelism does not work. However most people still respond to market signals. So I agree that this is how we would bring down the state, by pursuing success without it. We are nearing that scary point where all people (not just the majority) will be looking to work for the government in order to obtain status and security. As the government payroll grows it pits net tax consumers against net tax payers. Unfortunately the net tax consumers have most of the "credibility" of the existing intellectuals and powers that be on their side. This needs to change.
I have some interesting ideas to try to properly reconcile existing data driven intellectuals with the deductive reasoning of the Austrian school in a collective, concise and accurate manner. If you're familiar with engineering think, "design, build, test" cycle for philosophical, ethical, and economic thought. Wonder whether this forum would be a good place to get some feedback on those?
I remember reading somewhere that Andorra has a single-payer health care system or some kind of publicly financed health care. Who knew that lower taxes bring in greater tax revenue? :-p
Political Atheists Blog