More Singers Of "Immigrant Song"

Two more voices have been raised in favour of free immigration. These are important to take note of in view of the strict legislation Arizona has just passed. From the USSA, there is Steve Chapman, writing in Reason, that the Arizona idea sucks bad. Chapman concludes, most realistically:

If there is any lesson from recent experience, it's that foreigners are going to come here one way or another. The best option is to admit far more of them through wider legal channels. The alternative is to keep Arizona's southernmost ranches as the front line of a war the immigrants don't want and we can't win.

The article is short, and well worth a read.

The second singer of "Immigrant Song" (the original is by Led Zeppelin, and if you haven't heard it, you must) is our very own Shanu A of Liberty Institute. Shanu takes a principled libertarian stand. He supports free immigration and answers its critics on their principal objections: that it would increase crime; that it would lower wages (how nice!); that it would cause unemployment; that it would increase the burden on taxpayers and the Welfare State (why not abolish Welfare?). This is a great article from a young Indian libertarian, one that I heartily recommend.

I am reminded of the time I visited Kargil in 1985. I was taken up a mountain to a border outpost manned by Indian soldiers. They had their guns pointed at a similar Pakistani outpost just metres across a deep chasm. And the two sides were busy hurling choice Punjabi abuses at each other. Quite disgusted at all the foul language, I ventured out and looked down the chasm that separated India from Pakistan. A river flowed below. And villagers from both sides, with their goats and sheep, were happily going this way and that, crossing the border that tax-funded soldiers were defending with so much passion. Reminded me of that song:

All that you protect,
All that you defend,
Is just a borderline,
Another borderline.

If you have missed the thread of previous discussions on immigration, here are two recent posts: the first on Walter Williams vs Lew Rockwell on the subject; and the second on Kane, a US wrestler, and a principled libertarian, who also sings "Immigrant Song."

Good Morning, America! Anyone not read that yet? It is the greatest "Immigrant Song" ever, by the great Baba Pagal Nath Charsi. To read, click here.

Cops Are "Civilians": Take # 2

The Barkha Dutt Show last night was on Maoism, and featured a very senior IPS officer with a huge handlebar moustache; a very "military" mien. During the show, this dude said something so stupid and wrong that I decided to comment on it today, to be read along with yesterday's post. The IPS officer said that policemen are like soldiers in the armed forces, because they too wear a uniform. Barkha too kept referring to constables of the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) as "soldiers."

Nothing could be further from the truth. Policemen are "civilians" and this IPS officer was himself recruited through a "Civil Services Examination."

Indeed, what has gone wrong with policing in India is that it is increasingly becoming a "military police." This is just another sordid aspect of socialist totalitarianism. The Central State has over 200 battalions of the CRPF under its command and control, and they are used at will to supercede the local police. This is a development in our polity that should be a cause for great worry.

We in India, because of State Socialism, have lost the essence of "civil government." Our politicians are all "party animals" who never earn their keep in The Market. They just live off the fat of the land. Our "civil servants" are all party workers too - and this means that our government is a "party government" - of the socialist party or parties. The very word "civilian," in India, does not apply to any government functionary.

It was the Honourable East India Company that brought civil government to India. There were three "services" to which a recruit could belong - the civil service, the military service, and the opium service. The lowest rung of their civil service was that of "writer," and he was known as a "civilian" - to differentiate him from the military man. There was no separate police service till 1861, by which time the administration of India had been passed on to the Crown. But the Imperial Police was still civilian. George Orwell worked for this branch of the government - in Burma. The officers of the Imperial Police would have been aghast had anyone considered them at par with the military.

When India first got its police forces in 1861, the idea was still quite new in Britain itself. Robert Peel had created the London Metropolitan Police a few decades earlier - the "Bobby" is named after him - and it is unthinkable that these unarmed constables could be likened to recruits to the British Army. They were, and still are, civilians.

The very fact that a senior IPS officer, on prime-time television, could call his office "military," and the added fact that the CRPF "military police" are seen as the solution to our law and order problems, illustrates how horrible our "civil administration" has become. Especially the police.

In yesterday's post I had outlined my solution to Maoism: Withdraw the State Police from all tribal areas. Let the tribals "self-police." For a long-term solution to our problems, I suggest DRASTIC police reforms. We don't need a military police. We certainly don't need a politicized State police. At worst, let us have local constabulary under the control of city and town mayors, to perform duties of riot control only, where necessary. Nothing more.

For more on my views on criminal justice, see the relevant chapter in my Natural Order: Essays Exploring Civil Government & The Rule of Law, free e-book here.

Crises Are Good For Them, Barkha

Barkha Dutt of NDTV has written an article on the latest Maoist outrage - derailing a train in Bengal, causing over 100 deaths - that advocates strong State action to neutralize the Maoists. To quote:

Like in any conflict zone — with the Maoists too— we seek a deft combination of battle strategy and smart politics operating on parallel tracks. When we see civilians under attack or poor jawans forced to be at the frontline of danger, we certainly expect our government to use force — both preventive and offensive — against brutal, senseless terror. Whether this force takes the shape of the paramilitary or the army; whether air support should be deployed to speed up the ferrying of troops and weapons — we may leave to the strategists.

Note the royal "we."

My friends at the Natural Order Blog have a thought for today that all of us should ponder over:

“Fear of disorder and love of well-being unconsciously lead democracies to increase the functions of the central government,” said Alexis-Charles-Henri Clérel de Tocqueville in a warning that should be heeded by all freedom-loving people.

Barkha Dutt's column is titled "Call a spade a spade." She wants to call the Maoists a spade. What about the Total Chacha State? Shouldn't we call the King of Spades a spade too?

In reality, such crises are great for the King of Spades and his minions in North Block - the "strategists" Dutt refers to. I recall a senior IPS officer from Assam telling me, in the early 1980s, that "law and order problems are good for us." He added that "we get more powers, more personnel, more jeeps and more wireless sets." Barkha laments the fact that poor jawans die on the field - but these senior strategists in North Block just shuffle files and make hay.

If I may pen my sincere thoughts on a "solution" to Maoism, then it is this: Get the State Police to entirely withdraw from any involvement in tribal affairs. I briefly served as District Superintendent of Police in Arunachal Pradesh in 1987 - and the great thing there is that I had powers only in the towns. The hinterland was beyond my control - and the tribals lived happily in their "natural order." That is why there is still peace in Arunachal Pradesh. This should be the model for all forested areas inhabited by tribals. Give them full powers over their lives and properties. Give them Liberty and Property Under Law. And then tackle the "ideology" of Maoism politically.

What will happen if the Maoists "take control"? (Actually, they are already in control.) They will then have no "enemy" to fight. They will have to govern under Law. With the right politics educating the tribals on their rights and liberties, the natural order will be speedily restored. Of course, this will require The Market - a social institution that no political party in India says anything in favour of.

Something Good

There are over 800 posts on this blog, but never have I had anything good to say about anything that our Total Chacha State has either proposed or done. Let today be different.

It seems that a new bill has been proposed on land titling. The Express has written an editorial welcoming the move and is also carrying an article by DC Wadhwa, the greatest champion of clear property titles in India. Both the editorial as well as the column are worth reading - especially if you have ever tried to buy land anywhere in India. Of course, the bill has to be passed in Parliament and then our administration has to implement its provisions. However, this may not be too difficult because we now have satellite maps. It was done in British times the hard way. So kudos to the Total Chacha State. They have finally woken up to the fact that Private Property matters. Chacha has finally woken up to Hernando de Soto's message.

My question to Chacha: Why did it take you so long to realize that land titling is the MOST important job of any administration?

The answer: Chacha was too busy looking for identity cards for all citizens. This is a bogus idea Chacha has been chasing and funding all through his second term.

On this, there is some excellent news from the UK:

ID cards scheme to be scrapped within 100 days

Bill abolishing ID cards and national identity register will be the first piece of legislation introduced to parliament by the new government.

Chacha has done well to think of land titles. He could do better by abolishing the biometric ID card project. He could do even better by recognizing that "collective property" is a myth - and sell off the entire State-owned industrial sector. At long last they could run a bare-bones administration - a minimalist State - with zero taxation.

And talking of taxation: The ToI has a nice editorial on the subject today, saying that we in India need a "Tea Party Movement" just like the one in the US that is protesting against taxation. They quote Rand Paul.

Good idea. After all, most of the tea in the US Tea Party Movement comes from India. Ha ha.

US Wrestler Sings "Immigrant Song"

A few days ago, I blogged about an eminent “libertarian” professor at George Mason University, Walter Williams, and his “bipolar” views on US immigration: how he salutes the words inscribed at the base of the Statue of Liberty to start with, but ends up recommending strict enforcement of legislation on immigration.

Today, I have for you the views of a professional wrestler on the subject, and this man, Kane, whose real name is Glenn Jacobs, has indeed successfully wrestled with all the issues involved, proving himself to be a principled libertarian.

The most potent argument Kane uses is the inviolability of Private Property, which is the hallmark of libertarianism. But he goes further: He also shows up the hollowness of the idea – one that Williams espouses – that America “belongs” to the US government and they are therefore authorised to decide who will enter this nice piece of “collective property.” Kane sees no reason why, if he invites a friend from Mexico over for dinner, that friend should not be allowed to attend by State decree. He sees no reason why the US State should be able to decide which human being is “illegal” and which “legal.” As he sees it, illegal immigration is just another “victimless crime”: the only people objecting are the minions of the State. A great article, well worth the read.

Kane’s enlightened views are totally in agreement with my friend and alter-ego, Baba Pagal Nath Charsi, whose Good Morning America many of you have enjoyed. If you haven’t already read this “immigrant song” you can read the free e-book here. The Baba tells me that he has placed the manuscript up for sale on Scribd in the USSA, and I recommend it to all courageous libertarian publishers who would like to scandalise America on this important issue.

The only “visa” I need is the one on my credit card.

That, indeed, is what I call Liberty.

Kamal D Nutt, Sher Shah Suri, Manipur, Tolls - And TAXES!

The ToI has done well by drawing our attention to the neglected and unsettled North-East in a thoughtful editorial. There has been an economic blockade of Manipur for 45 days. What struck was the conclusion:

A lesson from the ongoing economic blockade is the urgent need to improve connectivity. More and better highways must be built across these states to end their political and economic isolation.

There is no better way to pauperise a people than by denying them connectivity to urban markets. This is why the word "remote" means "poor". When we say "remote village" we imply that it is distant from urban markets, and that getting there is tough. This word, "remote," applies to the ENTIRE North-East. Indeed, why only the North-East, the entire country needs modern highways - inter-city, inter city and peripheral towns, coastal expressways, all in a "hub-and-spoke" design. This should be top priority. Not ditch-digging, miseducation, or free rotten cereals.

Autocrats in the past understood well the importance of roads - for without them there would be no trade, and without the trade there would be no taxes. There are economically rational reasons why autocrats invest in "public goods" alone - so that they can pocket the surplus for themselves. Sher Shah Suri was one such autocrat, yet it is he who built the Grand Trunk Road from Peshawar, now in Pakistan, to Dacca, now in Bangladesh. This road is the lifeline of North India till today. Imagine North India without the Grand Truck Road. You cannot.

The late Mancur Olson, looking at autocrats in history providing public goods - "all roads lead to Rome" etc. - concluded that there cannot be "predatory states." But his analysis falls flat in India, where a Central Planner has employed a "scorched earth" policy on his own people. Read my very old column proving that our Total Chacha State is predatory, here.

Chacha Manmohan S Gandhi's vision of roads is well reflected in the views of his roads and highways minister, the great Kamal D Nutt, WTO-wrecker. This minister is looking to "contract-out" highway-building to private companies who will charge tolls. He is looking for ways to quadruple toll collections.

Hey, Chacha!

Why the FUCK do we pay (so many) taxes?

These include a ROAD TAX.

Chacha's Madness... And Mises' Method

Chacha Manmohan S Gandhi deigned to meet the press the other day. Mint has a long editorial on that, well worth reading, but what I would like to focus on are the "scientific" basis of two confident forecasts Chacha made. Mint says:

...he chose to disclose some gravity-defying numbers: inflation to be brought down to 5-6% by December and 8.5% growth rate this fiscal. These numbers ignore a wider reality of a world economy in turmoil and assume that India can quietly pass this storm.

How does Chacha forecast inflation and growth rates? His method is to measure economic variables, plot them on a chart, apply "econometrics" and voila! He has his forecast.

Ludwig von Mises called this "scientism." Chacha mimics the method of Physics and calls it "science." Mises said that this method cannot be applied to Economics at all, especially since there are no "constants" (there are only variables). He outlined an alternative epistemology for Economics, based on logical deductions from a priori axioms. What does this mean?

In Physics, all hypotheses have to be "empirically tested." But in Economics, this is quite unnecessary, as we begin our journey with self-evident truths that need no evidence from real world facts to prove them. Rather, these truths are embedded in our own minds, and are founded on our inherent logic. Just as in Arithmetic we do not need empirical testing to prove that 2+2=4, or in Geometry we do not need to go about measuring the sides of triangles to prove Pythagoras' theorem, so too in Economics. Logic is sufficient. Empirical verification is unnecessary. Let us take a small example, the Law of Marginal Utility, which says:

Whenever the supply of a good increases by one additional unit, provided each unit is regarded as of equal serviceability by a person, the value attached to this unit must decrease. For this additional unit can only be employed as a means for the attainment of a goal that is considered less valuable than the least valued goal satisfied by a unit of such good if the supply were one unit shorter.

This is a very important law in Economics. But to validate it we only need to apply our own logic to its statements and conclusions. We certainly don't need to go about "measuring utility."

Mises' writings on method are numerous - and mainstream economists hate them, for it challenges their competence at the most basic philosophical level, by asking them the inconvenient question of epistemology: How do you obtain "knowledge"? I once found an eminent economist advising his students to "read Human Action, but skip the first 90 pages." These first 90 pages, of course, concern method. My advice to all of you is to read Human Action beginnning at the beginning, paying special attention to the discourse on method.

Today, however, I have a treat for all of you: a short lecture by Hans-Hermann Hoppe on the Austrian Method in Economic Science. You can find the PDF here. The file contains two lectures delivered on the subject in 1987. I suggest you read just the first lecture to begin with - and read it many times over to grasp the underlying issues thoroughly. It is only 40 pages, and highly readable too. You will be forever enlightened.

There is method - and there is madness. Empiricism in Economics is madness masquerading as science. It is the chosen method of Central Planning, Keynesianism and Welfarism - and all three are pillars of modern Totalitarianism. Our Total Chacha State practices all three.

The opposition in Parliament call Chacha and his CONgress party "pseudo-secular." I would prefer to call them "pseudo-economists."

Don't believe in inflation and growth rate forecasts - they are nonsense.