Skip to content

For Equal Justice Under the Law, De-Monopolize Government Police

I wanted to write my response to the recent “Libertarian” Party shenanigans, but it’s going to have to wait now. After 2 months of “COVID” imprisonment and fascist business closures, mask orders and socialist distancing, and my having to write about those things, now the narrative managers have abruptly changed the subject to the RACE crap, out of no where!

The RACE crap and “racism” here, there and everywhere coming out of the woodwork after a long time that we haven’t had to hear that, and the recent police brutality incident in Minneapolis which has little to do with race or racism.

America is NOT a “racist country”! The U.S. over 50 years ago installed the “Civil Rights” Act and nationwide abolished Jim Crow laws and made it a crime to “discriminate” against people based on race, especially in businesses, schools and “public accommodations.” Many businesses and educational institutions have “affirmative action” programs for people of color.

And prior to the past 3 months scamdemic Wall Street panic-selling and governors-forced business closures, by the end of last year the unemployment rates for black and Hispanic Americans and women were at their lowest ever in history. Thanks to Trump signing those tax cuts and the deregulation he imposed.

But the scamdemic political scammers and Trump haters took all that away now. And the rioters are helping the self-destructive cause even further.

And this certainly isn’t a defense of Donald Trump, who continues to prosecute the racist drug war in which black Americans are incarcerated at much higher rates than whites, and Trump who continues the drone strikes which mainly murder innocent civilians in the Middle East and Asia.

Nevertheless there was Plan A to get rid of Donald Trump, “Russia collusions” that didn’t work. And then Plan B, the made-up Impeachment fiasco (that also didn’t work). And then Plan C, as soon as the Impeachment failed in February, the obsessed Trump haters then exploited a “virus” and imposed their fascist orders on the people to cause economic devastation, which they did.

And now it’s Plan D, exploit a nazi cop in Minneapolis murdering a black suspect, and use that one incident to engage in more economic destruction, theft, and falsely claim there’s an epidemic of racism in America.

So the rioting and looting, burning down buildings and cars and hurting people has nothing to do with racism. (Unless you want to refer to black-instigated anti-white racism…)

If the “Black Lives Matter” or antifa “protesters” cared in the least about the plight of black people, they wouldn’t have destroyed the minority-owned businesses in Minneapolis and other cities. And further, many of those small businesses are local grocers and gas stations, the destruction of which leaves lower-income residents at a further disadvantage in their providing for themselves. Thanks, “protesters.”

And those governors, mayors, or police chiefs who told local police or National Guard to “stand down”? Useless tax eaters, all of them.

Much of this is not to do with race, but is mainly to do with the people on the left carrying out their anti-capitalism political agenda.

In 2009-2010 were the Tea Party protests and rallies, especially after ObamaCare and other further centralization and tax-theft policies, because those protesters don’t like more of their income and earnings and freedom taken away from them. They cleaned up after themselves after their rallies and they didn’t destroy property. And then in 2011-2012 there were the Occupy Wall Street protests, in which property was destroyed and protesters left disgusting messes. There was a stark difference between the two groups. The Occupy Wall Street crowd wanted the government apparatus to be used to “take from others,” and get their “fair share,” if you know what I mean.

More recently, there have been crowds of people protesting peacefully against the fascist government-ordered shutdown of the businesses and fascist stay-at-home orders. Those protesters have gone to state capitols with their signs and chanting and giving public speeches, but by and large they were not violent.

The current return of protests, in which many of the “protesters” are not protesters but are criminal marauders and monsters, are not acting out any legitimate form of protest. They are burning down businesses and stealing from them, setting cars on fire, and hurting people.

They are merely acting out the same anti-capitalist mentality (.pdf) of the same people of the white-collar variety who had been panic-selling on Wall Street and ordering businesses shut down.

But the main issue with the police murder of a black man in Minneapolis is not to do with the race of victim or perpetrator, but was yet another criminal act of government violence against a civilian.

The answer to THAT problem is to de-monopolize community policing and security. Abolish government police. No one should have legal authority over anyone else, in which if the “civilian” does something criminal he goes to jail but if the “authority” does something criminal he does not go to jail. That is not a free society or a civilized society. That’s a criminal society, in my view.

As I wrote back in 2013, “No more police socialism.” Here is an excerpt:

So the way I see it, theoretically, police or “law enforcement” socialism is when government bureaucrats possess the ownership of the means of production and provision of community policing and security while outlawing (at least implicitly) any competing agencies to do the same.

But a more honest assessment of police socialism is this: The people of a community already possess or could possess the means of providing their own security themselves. Those interested in doing so already have the natural right to establish private policing firms or voluntary groups and have a right to possess whatever armaments they wish to carry out such endeavors.

But in the current situation of police socialism, government bureaucrats have stolen from the people their ability to provide their own security, by making such attempts artificially unlawful and through disarmament schemes weakening the people’s abilities to physically defend and protect themselves when their lives and property are threatened.

The government bureaucrats have usurped and forcibly monopolized the means of production in security provision at the people’s expense. That, in a nutshell, is what police socialism is.

So what do these bureaucrats and monopolists do with their monopoly power, enforce the law?

Well, they enforce the thousands and thousands of made-up laws on the books which make artificial criminals of totally innocent human beings, that’s for sure.

Okay, but is such a government-monopolized system efficient? I’ll bet Murray Rothbard would answer in the negative.

Do the government police protect people from the aggressions of others? (Hmmm. I hear snickering out there.)

As CopBlock’s Peter Eyre noted recently, the government police have no legal obligation to protect anyone.

So why the hell do they exist?

As the late William Norman Grigg correctly pointed out, government monopolized community policing and security is a “protection” racket.

And more recently, Ryan McMaken at the Mises Institute addresses the uselessness of the government police racket in Minneapolis.

Government police are useless. That is why the business owners in Minneapolis and elsewhere need to exercise their right to keep and bear arms, and to use them if necessary, to protect their businesses, to protect their lives and their livelihoods, like the Korean business owners did in the “wild west” of L.A. during the 1992 Rodney King riots.

And I am not suggesting that citizens just go and shoot people, obviously. But people have a right to self-defense. If someone is breaking into your home you have a right to exercise self-defense to protect yourself and your family. The same right applies to your place of business, which is your livelihood, your means of providing sustenance. Anyone directly invading and physically wrecking such means of sustenance is literally threatening your life.

But such rights of self-defense also apply to when the government is threatening you.

And no, I am not suggesting that people go and shoot police either! BUT, theoretically, people have the right to defend themselves against anyone who directly threatens their lives. Larken Rose controversially addressed that issue in this article.

As Judge Andrew Napolitano wrote a few years ago,

The historical reality of the Second Amendment’s protection of the right to keep and bear arms is not that it protects the right to shoot deer. It protects the right to shoot tyrants, and it protects the right to shoot at them effectively, thus, with the same instruments they would use upon us. If the Jews in the Warsaw ghetto had had the firepower and ammunition that the Nazis did, some of Poland might have stayed free and more persons would have survived the Holocaust.

Speaking of Jews, see this article on Jews and “gun control,” on the website of Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership.

And by the way, while Ronald Reagan, the NRA and the KKK all tried to legally prevent black Americans from owning and possessing firearms, it was the Black Panthers of the 1960s and ’70s who were gun rights biggest advocates, wrote UCLA law professor Adam Winkler.

I know, a lot of this is “10 foot pole” stuff, but there is a lot of ignorance and simple-mindedness out there. Certain ideas must be discussed.

If you are interested in all these ideas, and I hope you are, for further info see these important and enlightening articles:

From Murray Rothbard’s book, For a New Liberty, Ch. 12, “Police, Law and the Courts.” (Here is an excerpt by Murray Rothbard reprinted in Reason magazine, 1973.)

Hans-Hermann Hoppe on the idea of a private law society in these videos and the text version, from May of 2011.

Robert Murphy: But wouldn’t warlords take over? and The possibility of private law.

Per Bylund on competition in private justice.

And William Anderson on the State courts where the Duke lacrosse case is concerned.

Published inAuthoritarianismCivil LibertiesCorruptionDecentralizationFree marketGun controlPrivate propertySocialism