On Sweatshops, Liberty, and Social Justice

(Austrian) Economics, Business, Libertarian Theory, Nanny Statism, The Left
Share

Over at the Center for a Stateless Society, Michael Kleen asks whether compassionate libertarians can agree to oppose sweatshops as a matter of social justice. Ah, but what does he mean by “oppose” and “social justice”?

Libertarianism is not about people just getting by; it is about maximizing human liberty. Liberty cannot be achieved as long as eking out a living in dangerous conditions for 12 to 14 hours a day is an individual’s most attractive option.

So there could not have been liberty prior to modern times?

Either this line of argument was not thought out or Kleen subscribes to a Marxist-style determinist-materialist conception of history. I hope for the former, as these lines strike me as a propagandistic rhetorical flourish.

Incidentally, the conception of liberty used by Kleen here equivocates between the libertarian conception (i.e., not being subject to the threat or use of initiatory physical force) and a more left-liberal/socialist conception of liberty as positive economic freedoms. I’m afraid compassionate libertarians cannot get on board with such a conflation. To treat both as a matter of political justice is to try to wed contradictions, because “promoting” positive economic freedoms in this way will necessarily require the violation of rights (liberty). This is the mistake made by statist socialists and left-liberals.

Although Kleen uses the term “social justice,” he actually conflates political justice and social justice here and elsewhere in his post. If one insists on using the term “justice” in reference to positive economic freedoms, it is important to distinguish social justice (more a matter of personal morality and unenforceable in a libertarian legal system) from political justice (liberty/rights, which are enforceable in a libertarian legal system).

Kleen also seems to conflate pointing out that people often choose to work in a sweatshop because they see it as better than the alternatives with endorsing sweatshops as ideal work environments. I can’t speak for everyone who doesn’t see sweatshops as unjust and an indictment of capitalism, but I think that most do not think of sweatshops as ideal or unequivocally good. We just do not think that capitalism, as amazing as it is, can magically allow a poor, agricultural society to just skip over the terrible working conditions of the Industrial Revolution in its transition to an industrial or post-industrial economy.

Sweatshops are simply often better than the alternatives available and opposing them via statist means will only be counterproductive, harming the very poor such policies are meant to help. This does not mean we “favor” sweatshops in the abstract or propose them as an ideal business model. It does not mean we do not sympathize with the plight of the poor working in such conditions. Having to point this out makes me feel like I do when libertarians oppose the state performing some function and statists of all parties assume that means we don’t want that function performed at all — e.g., we oppose social-welfare policies so that must mean we hate the poor and want them out on the streets, starving to death, dying of disease. Hardly.

Kleen’s post contains a few other nits in need of picking:

On Sweatshops, Liberty, and Social Justice Read Post »

Mises Seminar — Australia

(Austrian) Economics, Anti-Statism, Education, Libertarian Theory, Statism, The Basics
Share

Austrian and libertarian ideas are spreading around the globe, thanks in large part to the work done by the Mises Institute to promote and spread these ideas. A case in point is the Mises Seminar being held November 25 and 26 in Sydney, Australia, and being put on by Aussienomics, an Austrian-Australian group, Liberty Australia, and the Macquare University Libertarian League. As the Aussienomics site notes,

On the 25-26th of November, a watershed moment in the history of Australian liberty will be occurring in Sydney: the Australian Mises Seminar. Over the past year we have collaborated with the best and brightest representatives of Austrian economics and libertarianism in Australia to bring you this incredible weekend.

The lead speaker at the event Hans-Hermann Hoppe. The event looks like it will be fantastic and soundly rooted in principled Rothbardian libertarian and Misesian-Rothbardian Austrian economics.

What really impressed me was the beautiful 108 page programme they produced (yes, 108 pages). It’s full of nice pictures and illustrations of Mises, Rothbard, and others, inspiring quotes, and an overview of the seminar. The main reason for its length, however is that it contains “Pre-Seminar Reading”. I’ve never seen this in a programme before but it’s a great idea (and possibly only because the material they drew from was from sources that do not lock down the content using state copyright law). As the programme explains:

The readings help provide a basic foundation and understanding of the core principles used to analyse the more complex issues that will be under discussion at the seminar. They will help you follow the overall themes and make informed contributions should you choose to do so. As a result, everyone gets more from attending the seminar.

The overview section first contains an article entitled A Primer on Austrian Economics by Jonathan M. Finegold Catalan which gives a brief summary of the school of thought, its history and contributions. The fundamental difference between advocates of the Austrian school and the rest of the economics profession is methodology. The second chapter of Hans-Hermann Hoppe’s book Economic Science and the Austrian Method, is On Praxeology and the Praxeological Foundation of Epistemology. This enthralling exposition highlights Mises insights and makes the case for praxeology as the ultimate foundation of all knowledge. Anatomy of the State by Murray N. Rothbard exemplifies the case as to what the state is, what it is not and why its existence should be lamented. What Libertarianism Is by Stephan Kinsella clarifies what separates libertarianism from other political philosophies.

The programme may be downloaded here. A podcast by some of the organizers discussing the Seminar may be found here.

Mises Seminar — Australia Read Post »

Antitrust Aggressor Loses

Business, Victimless Crimes
Share

As reported in the Wall Street Journal, memory chip manufacturer Rambus has lost its antitrust case against competitors Micron Technology Inc. and Hynix Semiconductor Inc.

Rambus had sought $4 billion in direct damages for the harm it allegedly suffered in the case, an amount that can be instantly tripled under California law. It also asked for punitive damages.

Rambus, a Silicon Valley designer of technology used in memory chips, accused Micron and Hynix of violating antitrust laws by conspiring to prevent Rambus technology from gaining traction in the market and fixing the price of memory chips.

The jury deliberated 8 weeks after a 3-month trial. Good result!

Antitrust Aggressor Loses Read Post »

Oh The Things (And People) I Own!

Environment, Nanny Statism, Victimless Crimes
Share

In one of my first posts on this blog I mentioned the usage of “the” as a catch-all term to include a variety of government-“offered” “goods” and “services” that people in general refer to offhandedly (“the” schools, “the” roads, etc.).

The Florida Department of Health has launched a campaign to eliminate second hand smoke from bars, parks and other public (or should that be “public”?) spaces. And what better way than to get folks behind this campaign that to be as inclusive as possible. Thus, the marketing/propaganda material uses “our” as much as possible. “Make our bars smoke-free” says one. Another one: “Make our public spaces smoke-free.” And — because we care about “the” children — “Make our parks smoke-free.”

Democracy, the devil that triumphed.

Oh The Things (And People) I Own! Read Post »

On the sexual (and political) exploitation of children

Police Statism, Private Crime
Share

Jerry SanduskyOf all the child sex abuse allegations levied against retired Penn State football coach Jerry Sandusky, none perhaps is more disturbing than the report that he used his non-profit foundation Second Mile to gain access to young boys — not only for himself, but for donors to his organization.  Sexually assaulting children is by itself a monstrous act to contemplate; the idea that they may be pimped out to others is nearly unfathomable.

Yet to hear the mainstream media report it might lead one to believe that the problem of child sexual slavery is reaching horrifying levels in the U. S., and while it’s certainly not something to be ignored, it’s also not the “epidemic” the alarmists — and especially law enforcement — have portrayed it as.

One example of this media-fueled hysteria is a report released in September 2010 by the Women’s Funding Network, which earned them a national spotlight, not to mention an invitation from a House subcommittee, before which WFN chief program officer Deborah Richardson breathlessly warned that child prostitution was “exploding” in the U. S. — anywhere from 20 percent in New York to 65 percent in Minnesota.  Lock up your daughters!

The study focused in particular on classified ad sites such as Backpage.com and Craigslist, whose adult sections, it claimed, were enabling the rapid expansion of the child sex trade.  Craigslist succumbed to pressure brought by numerous U. S. Attorneys and closed its adult section, but The Village Voice, whose parent company owns Backpage, decided to do its own review of the study, and found it was based on looking at the pictures of girls in sex ads on the Internet — and making assumptions that a certain percentage of those ads must be for underage sex workers.  There was nothing remotely scientific about the data acquisition or methodology; the research group almost literally made up most of the data.

Craigslist sex adDespite its questionable methods and conclusions, the study’s findings blew across the media landscape like a summer wildfire.  Its numbers were reported without any critical analysis in papers such as USA Today and the Detroit Free Press, and cited by actress (and sex trafficking activist) Demi Moore, whose Web site still links to the WFN study.

None of this means that the child sex trade doesn’t exist, or that there aren’t a lot more Jerry Sanduskys lurking out there.  But it does mean that publicizing bogus studies without any critical context can lead to bad policy decisions by lawmakers and law enforcement agencies.  And we end up with Megan’s Law and Jessica’s Law and the Adam Walsh Act and other ill-conceived laws, all named after dead kids to make them seem critical to civilization’s continued existence, and not the further expansion of state power that they really are.

The air had barely escaped an Orlando courtroom following the Casey Anthony trial, in which she was found not guilty of murdering her two-year-old daughter, before an activist began pushing for a “Caylee’s Law”, which would have made it a felony for parents not to report a missing child within 24 hours.  It is precisely during these times of high emotion, when sensationalized cases of crimes against children make headlines and inflame radio personalities, that such laws should not be considered.  For they often serve only to increase the power of the police state without doing much to protect their intended beneficiaries.  Politically popular and emotionally resonant they may be, but dead kids make for bad laws.

Raising awareness of social ills is important, but so is truth and justice, and the media serve neither when they engage in reporting that looks less like responsible journalism and more like alarmist propaganda for an ever-encroaching state.

On the sexual (and political) exploitation of children Read Post »

Scroll to Top