FALL 1994 Volume 1.1
The official publication of the Vancouver Island Libertarian Association, an official riding association of the Libertarian Party of Canada, 1 St. John's Road, Suite 301, Toronto, ON, M6P 4C7.
(416) 763-3688
VILA advocates a free market, civil liberties, self-responsibility and minimum government interference in the lives of individuals. Our fundamental principles forbid the initiation of force, fraud or coercion against any individual by other individuals, including those in government.
Voting membership in the VILA or the LPC requires the signing of the Statement of Principles.
As a registered political party, contributions to the LPC or VILA qualify for federal political party donation tax credits.
Membership in VILA is $5 for five years..
Address newsletter inquires to:
R. Kent Cowan, PublisherArticles of interest to libertarians are welcome and encouraged.
Island Libertarian
PO Box 8245
Victoria, B.C.
CANADA V8W 3R9
Voice/FAX: (604)595-5735BBS: 380-4030
Internet address:
ub774@freenet.victoria.bc.ca
Unless otherwise noted, all original material my be reprinted freely, accompanied by the following credit: "Reprinted from the Island Libertarian, Box 8245., Victoria, BC, V8W 3R9 (Annual Subscription $15)."
Welcome to the first issue of Island Libertarian, your connection with issues of concern to libertarians, classical liberals, libertarian conservatives, anarcho- capitalists and objectivists on this bit of island paradise. This issue of Island Libertarian is being sent to you by the members of the Vancouver Island Libertarian Association, through their donations. If you would like to join VILA please fill in the form on page five and send it in. If you have any suggestions or story ideas for the newsletter, we'd like to hear from you.
by R. Kent Cowan, Secretary
Last February, four Vancouver Island residents meet in the living room of a long time Libertarian, Jack Boulogne, to form a new riding association of the Libertarian Party of Canada.
The Vancouver Island Libertarian Association was formed as a means to challenge the political status quo on Vancouver Island. An informal and unofficial VILA ran two candidates on the Island during the last federal election: Mark Chase of Nanaimo and Kent Cowan of Victoria.
It became clear during the campaign that a great deal of work is required to bring libertarian ideas, and the very name "libertarian," to people on Vancouver Island. The way to address this need was the formation of a riding association that would direct future political campaigns and act as a way to "get the word out."
Mark Chase was elected VILA's first President, Ken Wiebe and Jack both hold the title of Vice President and Kent Cowan elected Secretary Treasurer.
We would like VILA to be a place where you can achieve the goals you feel are important to your freedom.
We aim to further libertarianism not only through the political system, but by providing information so you can practice libertarianism in your own life. It is also our desire to make VILA a truly libertarian association, both in its inner workings and goals.
If you feel a particular goal worthwhile, you have an opportunity with VILA's Directed Donations plan to direct our efforts in areas you believe will further the libertarian objective (the form is available on the last page, please consider making a donation today!). Or, if you prefer, you can apply for our Freedom Gold plan, which has received approval in principle from the VILA executive.
by Ken Wiebe, Vice President
As you know, many libertarian economists advocate a return to using gold and silver as the standard medium of exchange. In order to encourage members and supporters to become accustomed to owning and using gold coins, we would like to propose the following program.
For every $150 donation to VILA, the Association would like give 1/10 ounce gold Maple Leaf coin to anyone the donor chooses. The market value of the $5 gold coin fluctuates daily, and is currently approximately valued at $80 Canadian. Along with the coin, we would include a letter of gratitude, a brief statement of the value of legitimate currency, and a short explanation of the Libertarian Party of Canada and the VILA. The donor will receive the usual tax receipt for federal political party contributions.
This is an excellent way to promote the party, the movement and have a little fun too. Who wouldn't like to receive a gold Maple Leaf coin as a gift? Naturally, this promotion cannot continue forever with the uncertainty surrounding the Canadian dollar and fluctuating gold prices.
All funds raised through this promotion would go toward VILA operating expenses, and form the bulk of our `war chest' for future election campaigns. It costs approximately $8000 per candidate to run a serious campaign. It would be a major coup for VILA to run a full slate of candidates on the Island, and that is our goal.
Fed up with Left/Right labels?
Use this improved political compass to test your identity. Take the World's Smallest Political Quiz.
Circle "Y" when you agree, "M" for Maybe or unsure, "N" for No.
Are you a self-governor on PERSONAL issues? 20 10 0
* Military service should be voluntary. (No draft) Y M N
* Govt. should NOT control radio, TV, or the press Y M N
* Repeal regulations on sex by consenting adults Y M N
* Drug laws do more harm than good. Repeal them Y M N
* Let people immigrate and emigrate freely Y M N
My PERSONAL self-governor score: 20 for Y, 10 for M, 0 for N _________
Are you a self-governor on ECONOMIC issues? 20 10 0
* Businesses & farms should operate without govt. subsidies.
Y M N
* People are better off with free trade than with tariffs.
Y M N
* Minimum wage laws cause unemployment. Repeal them. Y M N
* End taxes. Pay for services with user fees Y M N
* Other countries should provide their own defense Y M N
My ECONOMIC self-governor score: 20 for Y, 10 for M, 0 for N _________
Mark your PERSONAL score on the left and your ECONOMIC score on the right. Then, follow the grid lines (rows of dots) until they meet at your political identity! An example for someone who scored 20 on Personal and 30 on Economic is indicated with an asterisk (*).
The compass measures self-government. Liberals (LEF) value freedom of expression. Conservatives (CON) value free enterprise. Libertarians (LIB) value both. Authoritarians (AUT) are against both.
LIB = Libertarian
./ \. CON = Conservative (Right)
./ . \. CEN = Centrist
./ . . \. LEF = Liberal (Left)
./ . . . \. AUT = Authoritarian
./ . .LIB. . \.
./ \. . . . ./ \.
./ . \.___.___.___./ . \.
./ . . ! . . . ! . . \.
./ . . ! . . ! . . \.
./ . . . ! . . . ! . . . \.
100 \. .LEF. ! .CEN. ! .CON. ./ 100
90 \. . . ! . . . ! . . ./ 90
80 \. . !___.___.___! . ./ 80
70 \. ./ . . . \. ./ 70
60 \./ . . * . \./ 60
Personal 50 \. . . . ./ 50 Economic
Self-Governor 40 \. .AUT. ./ 40 Self-Governor
Score 30 \. . ./ 30 Score
20 \. ./ 20
10 \./ 10
0 0
Examples:
M. Thatcher (right)
Pierre Trudeau (left)
Henry David Thoreau and Thomas Jefferson (top)
Stalin and Hitler (bottom)
Would you like an information kit about libertarian ideas,
including a best-selling hardbound book, five quiz cards,
and more? Send an $8.00 contribution to help with the
costs to: Advocates for Self-Government, 3955
Pleasantdale Road #106 A, Atlanta, GA 30340
Tel: 404-417-1304 800-932-1776.
Copyright, 1992, Advocates for Self-Government, Inc.
By Robert Brakeman
Most wise people of most times and places, as well a great mob of secondary-literary hacks, curbstone philosophers, and intellectual knaves, have said at some point in their lives, "In order for liberty to have meaning at all, it has to have meaning for all our citizens", if we're serious about our love for freedom, we'll fight for it, even when it's being exercised by people we consider lunatics, or even worse."
What's being said is that if a particular "right" is contingent upon what those in political power happen to think of the person exercising the right, it's no right at all - it's a mere privilege subject to revocation, like an 8th grader's hall pass or a politician's sworn oath. We must not differentiate among persons.
There's something equally true which both leftists and rightists have generally failed to see. It is that in thinking of freedom, we also should differentiate among freedoms. Just as we should not say, "I believe liberty should be enjoyed by all persons", and then look to see who a particular liberty-enjoyer is to decide whether to include him out, so we should not say, "I believe that all persons should enjoy freedom to control their lives as long as they do not aggress against others, then look to see the way in which they're controlling their lives (peaceably) so we can decide whether to make exceptions to the rule.
If you were to ask a thousand liberals and a thousand conservatives "Should a person have absolute control over his or her own life as long as no aggression is committed against others?" ninety nine percent of each would nod so hard they'd endanger their upper vertebrae. So why do liberals spend so much time advocating the theft of money from people they don't like and the giving of it to those they like better (under such euphemisms as taxes and welfare)? Why do conservatives hardly finish breakfast before they're out trying to put people in cages for doing things with their own bodies that conservatives don't like?
Both groups allow their visions of the "Good" Society to override their theoretical commitment to liberty in the abstract.
What is important is there is only one liberty - the liberty to control one's own life. What we tend to think of as various freedoms are just different expressions of that one liberty. A person seeking to keep that which he has earned, and one trying to use his body as he sees fit are both expressing the same (the only) claim to liberty - they are claiming the absolute right to their lives and products of those lives.
Once we realize that there is only one liberty (with various ways of expressing it), it is logically easy to conclude it's as indefensible to differentiate among ways of expressing freedom as it is to distinguish among people doing so. Over and over and over again (to paraphrase FDR), we need to stress that once we've established that liberty is the issue in a given case (no aggressive acts), the argument is over. The way the person in question is enjoying liberty (controlling his own life) is as irrelevant as who he is. We must defend freedom we don't like as much as individuals we don't like.
Libertarianism is a political philosophy that is based on individual freedom, choice and responsibility. The fundamental principle is that all individuals have the right to exercise sole dominion over their own lives and have the right to live in whatever manner they choose, so long as they do not forcibly interfere with the equal right of others to live in whatever manner they choose. Governments throughout history have regularly operated on the opposite principle; that government has the right to dispose of the lives of individuals and the fruits of their labour.
Libertarians on the other hand deny the right of any government to do these things and hold that where governments exist they must not violate the rights of any individual, namely:
Since governments, when instituted, must not violate individual rights, libertarians oppose all interference by government in the areas of voluntary and contractional relations among individuals. Individuals must not be forced to sacrifice their lives and property for the benefit of others. Individuals should be left free by government to deal with one another as free traders; and the resultant economic system, the only one compatible with the protection of individual rights, is the free market.
By Paul Geddes
The forests are often credited with being the major engine of economic activity in British Columbia. Forest lands cover 45% of the province and a good proportion of BC's employment comes from logging, manufacturing wood products and otherwise servicing this sector (transportation, trade and other business services). Lumber, pulp & paper comprise 50% of BC's foreign exports.
As in many other jurisdictions, in BC many hard working entrepreneurs and seemingly independent and vibrant business organizations are dependent on the whims of government policy for their prosperity. With one big exception. In most other jurisdictions, government doesn't own the resource that is the basis for the private economy. Currently, title to 95% of the forest lands of BC are held by the provincial government.
The numbers are similar in other Canadian provinces. BC may have the more productive forest lands but these only account for about a fifth of Canada's forests. Across Canada, 94% of forests are owned by the government. Among the major wood producing nations only the USSR topped us in percentage of forest lands owned by government (recent events suggest this will like change soon). Even pre-Wall-destruction Eastern Europe had a higher percentage of private ownership of forests. And in Sweden, the much envied paragon of socialist virtue, 74% of forest lands are privately owned.
The consequences of this large share of government ownership is often alluded to in the myriad of government commissions and reports on the forestry sector in BC. The Pearse Royal Commission (1976), Economic Council of Canada Report (1984) and the BC Forest Resources Commission (1991) all alluded to the vast dissipation of valuable BC forest rents. Because of our form of ownership, potentially efficient changes (that could add net benefits to all) have little chance of success. Many people have different demands on the forest resource but with public ownership, the only way to get your use is through politics. Rather than competing with other uses by offering bids (best estimate of the discounted future net benefits), in BC too many forest use decisions are made on a basis of who can mobilize the most political pressure.
As landlord, the BC government chooses to earn its revenue mostly through "stumpage fees". Private companies pay stumpage for the volume of trees they harvest. Setting these fees at the right level is difficult and the government also has to decide who is allowed to harvest which trees at that price. Most of the forest lands are placed under the control of private organizations with one of two types of tenure or grant of exclusive right to harvest. The "Forest Licence" created by 1979 Forest Act covers about two-thirds of BC's forests. Private organizations are given to guarantee for a certain volume of wood in return for a promise to meet minimum standard of reforestation and other duties. The cost of such operations are credited against the stumpage payable. Another fourth of BC forests are covered by the often controversial "Tree Farm Licence (TFL)". Under a TFL, the private organization is given more freedom to manage their area. They are entitled to harvest as much timber so as to maintain a sustained yield of timber.
There is much debate among economists and other forest watchers about whether either type of tenure gives tenants the incentive to manage the resource to maximize the long term interests of its owner. Among the problems debated:
How do participants know if the stumpage rates are set at the correct level? Agricultural land is also variable productivity. Owners of farmland capture the rent from richer land by having extra crops to sell. In the forests, the private tenant (not the landlord) captures the extra rent from luckily having more easily harvested trees. What if timber production is not the best use of land? What incentives do forest tenants have to save forests for other uses if hunters and other recreational users are willing to pay enough not to have an area harvested?
Are adequate resources being devoted to reforestation? Tenants do not have exclusive harvest rights in perpetuity. Licences can't be sold without government interference and some licences have been rescinded and altered. It is not surprising that many forest companies have been accused of only supplying the minimum reforestry required to maintain their tenancy. Private owners would likely invest differently.
The solution, as every libertarian knows, is to turn forests as quickly as possible to private ownership. Ownership is the human institution devised to allow people with different ideas about the uses of resources to have a peaceful manner to resolve conflicts in the marketplace. The self-interest of owners will tend to make sure that resources aren't wasted, but used where they please the most consumers. Private property rights also encourage dynamism by allowing those who come up with new ideas to bid resources from less valuable uses. No one claims that a world of more constant and stable property rights would have no problems, but compared to our present world, many efficiency gains (in the broadest sense of this term) are possible.
So how can we get private ownership of BC's forest resources? For private property rights to work, they have to be seen as legitimate. Otherwise so much resources will have to be devoted to exercising you control over what you think is yours in law, that it won't be worthwhile. A good plan must be politically acceptable. We should be able to adapt variations of the programs used by the current governments of Eastern Europe as they face a similar problem in trying to liberate their economies from government's deadly control. After settling native land claims, some of the best forest lands could be sold at auction (the capitalized value of future stumpage rates could be substantial enough to retire much of the government debt). Other forest lands could be divided into smaller units and given to the public. One interesting option would be to have citizens (foresters, hunters, hikers or wild animal lovers) compete for the available forests with government-given vouchers. Each group should be able to outbid others for at least some of the forest lands.
If most citizens make some gain from taking the forests out of government control, future property rights should retain legitimacy and make defence of property cheap enough for all of us to make great gains from a much vitalized forest resource.
(Reprinted with permission from the West Coast Libertarian, 922 Cloverley St. N. Vancouver, BC, V7L 1N3. Annual Subscription $15).
We. the members of the Libertarian Party of Canada, support the following principles:
VOTING MEMBERSHIP REQUIRES A SIGNATURE.
I hereby certify that I believe in and promise to uphold the Statement of Principles of the Libertarian Party of Canada.
Signature:_______________________________
Date:________________
Membership is $5 for five years.
Associate membership (non-voting) is $5 for five years.
VILA, Box 8245, Victoria, V8W 3R9
Name ______________________________________ Date _______________ Address ________________________________________________________ City _____________________ Province __________ Postal Code _____ Do you want the recipient organization to be given your name etc.? Yes No Do you want to be issued a tax receipt? (If yes, we need your SIN) Yes No Signature ____________________________________ SIN _____________The Libertarian Party of Canada advocates government policy consistent with the principle that your taxes are your money, and you have the right to determine how it is spent. During the 1993 federal election, the Libertarian Party of Canada advocated a tax menu system, whereby each taxpayer indicates to government the manner in which he would prefer his tax money to be budgeted. The VILA Directed Donation plan is designed to familiarize our members and supporters with the practical aspects of such a system. Please use the appropriate spaces for your recommendations:
Requested Donation Direction (% or $ amount)
VILA general revenue,
(towards expenses and advertising etc.) ______________
VILA Election readiness fund ______________
Libertarian Party of Canada, Toronto HQ ______________
* Recipient Organization:
_____________________________________ ______________
TOTAL Donation $______________
Thank You for supporting the Vancouver Island Libertarian Association and the Libertarian Party of Canada.
* Note: To be considered for worthy cause Directed Donations the recipient organization must be actively pursuing the enhancement of individual rights and freedoms. Not all organizations claiming to do this actually do. Inclusion of any particular organization is at the discretion of the executive of the Vancouver Island Libertarian Association and subject to change without notice. Please ensure your choice is currently eligible. If the organization is deemed ineligible, no donation will be made, your donation will be refunded in full and no federal political party donation tax receipt will be issued.
Freedom Gold is a separate program and participants should use a different form.