The wrong of any isolated individual aggression is easily recognisable, nevertheless if the same action is systematically performed at a big scale by an organized group of people that is established in a position of domination, then the evil may be camouflaged as a habit or custom. 

​

Such aggressions are often justified as a means to an alleged "greater good" or necessity consisting of collective and abstract terms to which a higher status is assigned than that of the individuals who form it. 

​

“Society's needs come before the individuals' needs” Adolf Hitler used to say. According to their state official "unequivocally settled" science, Jews were dangerous to society, so exterminating them was going to protect people. 

​

The more they “love” these abstractions (world, community, nature, etc…), the more they hate real individual human beings. —  Nick Szabo

​

Sometimes the "greater good" is just the avoidance of a supposed catastrophe or emergency, so the evil act is said to be the only unavoidable way to fight an urgent disaster. 

​

The urge to save humanity is almost always only a false-face for the urge to rule it. — H.L. Mencken.

 

The instil of fear is a powerful weapon to get compliance and submission.

 

Those who would give up a little liberty to gain a little security, will deserve neither, and they’ll probably will end up losing both. — Benjamin Franklin.

​

In order to decrease the rejection of aggression, hate may be projected against the harmed people who is vilified and used as a scapegoat.

 

No end justifies any violation of rights. Respecting people and their freedom is always the greater good and the most important end. First, do not harm.

​

​

Nowadays, in order to institutionalize greed for the goods of others, it is very common to resort to the abstraction of wealth equality by appealing to the instinct of envy.

​

Natural economic inequality is wrongfully associated to poverty by describing the economy as a static zero sum game in which all wealth comes at the expense of someone else.

​

Those theories do not recognize the expansion and dynamism of free economic systems that create and mobilize prosperity.

​

Not all equality is desirable; forced wealth equality is certainly not.

​

There is all the difference in the world between treating people equally and attempting to make them equal. — Friederich Hayek.

​

The only equality in a civilized and peaceful society is the Equality before the Law. 

​

A society that puts economic equality ahead of freedom will end up with neither equality nor freedom. — Milton Friedman.

​

The main source of material inequality is one's own being. Economic value naturally differs among people as different preferences and choices imply unequal economic outcomes. Humans are not even equal to themselves in different days and are naturally conditioned by externalities like the place, time and community in which we they are born.

​

From the fact that people are very different if follows that, if we treat them equally, the result must be inequality in their actual position, and that the only way to place them in an equal position would be to treat them differently. Equality before the law and material equality are therefore not only different but are in conflict with each other; and we can achieve either one or the other, but not both at the same time. — Friederich Hayek.

 

If there is not equality of outcomes among people born to the same parents and raised under the same roof, why should equality of outcomes be expected when conditions are not nearly so comparable? — Thomas Sowell.

​

Diversity is something to be celebrated with tolerance.

​

​

The political system that abolishs private property is called socialism. 

Socialist ideology is based on the state ownership of production means, nevertheless, in pure socialism (also called communism) practically all goods belong to the state since almost any good can be used as a means for for production.

​

If a state is defined as the organized group of people that has the monopoly of violence over a certain territory and a mafia as that organized banditry that extracts income through the use of violence, then under socialism, the state is just a sofisticated mafia that justifies its criminal activity as good and necessary. Basically a mafia with schools that requires adulation for the crimes it commits. 

 

Socialism is sometimes wrongly defined as a system of wealth equality, however, any political system should be explained by the measures it carries out, not by the intended consequences.

All pure socialists experiments result in general impoverishment and extreme wealth inequality between civilians and those with politic power. The misallocation of resources turns economies into humanitarian disasters, and while the politic class thrive through confiscation, the vast majority get impoverish. 

Hence, all regimes that start as real socialism end up being described as “not real socialism”; it is like if a "rain dance" were defined as a dance that causes raining, so if rain does appear afterwards, it would be said that it was "not a real rain dance". Any definition of a political system must be outcome-neutral, or a fallacy will be committed.

 

If politics is the art and science of managing centralized coercion, then socialism is the increasing of political inequality since it empowers a bureaucratic elite that controls and commands all the economic activity. Absolutism and despotism are in the DNA of socialism since an extreme concentration of power is required to violate private property in a general way. 

What belongs to everybody belongs to nobody; or rather to the few who exercise the property right in the name of “everybody".

Political institutions tend to use the word “social” to misapply what only works at a small scale and based on trust, to a huge scale and via coercion.

“We and we alone have the best social welfare measures” said the Propaganda Minister of National Socialist German Workers’ Party, Joseph Goebbels in 1944.

If the term "social" refers to voluntary human interactions, then there is no political system more anti-social than socialism.

​

Socialism corrupts the term Law in order to disguise any violation of rights as a supposed enforcement of Law.

Lex injusta non est lex (Unjust law is not law) — San Agustín de Hipona.

 

Natural Law is simple: any aggression against rights is wrong, so the extensiveness of any legislation tends to imply the existence of rules that oppose Law.

As the representation of Justice by a girl with blinded eyes suggests, Law applies equally to all regardless of particular circumstances. Human rights are universal.

 

Nevertheless, legislation and regulation are frequently used to codify injustice by establishing the aggressors’ own will in form of written mandates, norms, decrees, statutes, bills, rules of conduct, and so on. 

One has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws — Martin Luther King Jr. 

Good people disobey bad “laws”.

Legislation frequently consists of norms that apply to particular subjects, like privileges or discriminatory rules.

 

Most constitutions were initially designed with the purpose of defending human rights, nevertheless there is no government of laws, but government of people. Any norm can be interpreted and amended in multiple ways. Legislation is made, executed and sanctioned by a dominating group of people that tends to not make any norm that harms them, and in the case that such a norm exists, then they will change it or breach it. 

 

​

Beyond ethics, aggression against private property impedes economic development by hindering economic calculation and disincentivizing the creation of wealth. 

​

When you subsidise poverty and failure, you get more of both. — James Dale Davidson.

​

The state aggressions against free exchanges are called economic interventions. 

Intervened economies substitute the coordination through knowledge for mandates. 

​

As any aggression, any economic intervention benefits specific individuals at the expense of others who are harmed.

Very frequently it brings consequences that are opposite to the hopes that inspired the economic policy, like the so-called "cobra effect".

In xxx year the Crown of England had the will to reduce the amount of cobras that habited in its colony of India, so it rewarded its capture. 

Los incentivos económicos llevaron a la cría de cobras para conseguir el premio. Para cuando el programa terminó, la cantidad de cobras en India se había multiplicado varias veces.​

​

The interventions consisting of Price Controls are another clear example of it:

​

-Forcing prices staying below those of a free market is usually motivated by the scarcity of some good, however it results in a shortage and a deterioration of the good. The artificially low prices harm providers and disincentivize the economization of its consumption since the artificial price signals abundance.  

​

-Inversely, forcing the increasing of prices is frequently motivated by the lack of scarcity, nevertheless it causes a higher surplus. Demand is reduced due to the decrease in consumers' purchasing power.

The providers that compete by offering lower prices get specially harmed. An example is the Minimum Wage Laws, which basically is the forcefully increasing of the price of hiring; in that case, the less skilled and experienced unemployed workers get the worst consequences .

Nowadays in most western countries, due to taxes, el gasto por trabajador is around 2x el salario que percibe. ¿Se imaginan que se prohibiese trabajar por cuenta propia a todos aquellos trabajadores que no lograsen unos ingresos de 2x el sueldo mínimo?

El paro deriva de la intervención y sus rigideces legislativas since there is as much work to be done as there are unfulfilled desires.

​

A case that brings together a simultaneous forced increasing and decreasing in price of two similar goods is the so called Greham’s Law, which establishes that when prices of diferent moneys are artificially fixed, then the overvalued money drives the undervalued money out of the legal market.

That has happened historically whenever the price between gold and silver was forcefully fixed. As The price of gold tended to be forced below when used in legal exchange, so it ceased to be used for that. 

​

La propaganda política argues that intervened prices are "fair" rates, however, the only fair rates are those mutually agreed between the two consenting parts involved in the exchange.

​

Otras intervenciones son creadas con la intención específica de perjudicar a ciertas personas. 

An example is protectionism, which should be better called privilegionismo because it consists in a conjunto de intervenciones estatales that privilegian some businesses by imposing restrictions to their competitors. It basically favours the privileged businesses at the expense of everyone else, because besides harming those providers who are impeded to compete, it harms any possible consumer as the availability of goods decreases.

 

protectionism halts cooperation By banning the implementation of competitive advantages. 

"La competencia es la máxima forma de cooperación" - Antonio Escohotado. 

"Competimos por ser mejores cooperadores, y cooperamos para ser mejores competidores" - Juan Ramon Rallo.

La competencia entre service providers guarantees the quality and abaratamiento del servicio, además de la calidad de los puestos de trabajo y el incremento de los salarios.

 

If the restrictions are specifically imposed to foreign companies with the goal of reducing imports, then the proteccionismo is called mercantilismo.

What "(economic) protection" teaches us, is to do to ourselves in time of peace what enemies seek to do to us in time of war.” ― Henry George. 

Frederich Bastiat warned that “when goods don’t cross borders, soldiers will”. Denying the possibility of voluntary exchange is banning the only possible way to acquire other people's goods peacefully.

 

El llamado corporativismo o clientelismo político es un tipo de proteccionismo en el que se privilegia a grandes compañías ya establecidas mediante la imposición de restricciones a las competidoras que no cuentan con lazos políticos. It results in the consolidation of monopolios and oligopolios.

La hyper-regulación tiene consecuencias similares since there are economies of scale in complying with regulations that raise barriers to the entry of small innovators.

​

Some legislations have the specific goal of perpetuating intellectual monopolies, like the INTELLECTUAL "PROPERTY" legislation."IP" forbids the reproduction of knowledge, forcing people to treat easily replicable concepts as scarce physical goods, which violates actual property rights. It halts competition and slows down progress as la emulación de lo exitoso es parte esencial del desarrollo económico.

 

Interventionism is also used to coercively punish those services that satisfy the demand of what may be considered risky or not virtuous, like vices. The prosecution of peaceful voluntary exchanges as crimes triggers the formation of gangs and mafias around the forbidden service, since real criminals that are already in risk of being imprisoned get attracted by the boosting in profits that the forced shortage brings. 

​

No todo lo inmoral debería ser ilegal. If two consenting adults reach a voluntary agreement whereby they both expect to improve their situation, no third person should use violence in order to prevent the exchange. 

​

An interventionist spiral occurs when more intervention is seen as the cure for the problems that intervention itself has created. For example, the corruption of the state apparatus is a regular and natural effect of extreme interventionism, nevertheless, more intervention is frequently presented as a way to solve corruption.

 

The perpetuation of intervention in some services may lead people to think of the impossibility of those services through voluntary exchanges without the aggressors as intermediaries. 

Shortly after the collapse of the Soviet Union, a British economist was asked by the director of bread production in the Russian City of St. Petersburgs: “Please understand that we are keen to move towards a market system, but we need to understand how such a system works. Tell me, for example, who is in charge of the supply of bread to the population of London?” Soviet mind was astonished by the notion that the economy could operate without a planner to coordinate it. — Christian Niemietz. 

 

Hay alternativas a cada una de las funciones que proporciona el Estado, existieron y pueden existir.

 

 

Beyond the evilness of impeding economic exchange is that of directly subtracting others property.

Nowadays, in the so called welfare states is considered legit to resist against petty theft, however, it is said to be a fraud resisting against recurrent confiscation of income and life savings.

So those neighbourhoods where a wallet could be stolen are said to be dangerous,  however, territories where residents get their bank accounts systematically drained by political entities are called welfare countries. 

​

Violent extraction of other people’s peaceful acquired goods is evil, even if the aggressor thinks somebody else will benefit from it; the same way that violent interference against other people’s peaceful actions is evil, even if the aggressor thinks it is for their own good.

​

If theft is defined as the extraction other people’s property without their consent, then taxes are just recurrent theft. 

Theft is called robbery if violence is applied during the extraction and it is called extortion when is the owner who ends up delivering the property in order to be free of the threat of violence. 

In order to boost recurrent theft it is necessary to violate personal privacy, that is why direct taxes consist of extortions to obtain personal info that is later used in further extortions to maximize the confiscation of property.