1. Skip to navigation
  2. Skip to content
  3. Skip to sidebar
Source link: http://archive.mises.org/13420/samuel-edward-konkin-iii/

Samuel Edward Konkin III

July 29, 2010 by

Sam Konkin opened his publications to every libertarian point of view. At the top of his masthead, in every issue, he proudly printed the statement, “Everyone appearing in this publication disagrees!” FULL ARTICLE by Jeff Riggenbach

{ 15 comments }

James W. McGillivray July 29, 2010 at 10:14 am

Where is Sam Konkin now? Could anybody explain why Social Credit was wrong in wanting to increase the supply of money in 1935 when there was a very very serious shortage of money in Canada, and I think also in the rest of the world. The U.S. Stockmarket collapse led to bank failures and hence to a lack of money, either fiat money or credit money. Almost the same situation as we perhaps, have narrowly escaped now. Stupidly people were led to believe that we could not print some money for ourselves because we did not have”gold ‘to back it up. Social Crediters knew that this was nonsense. Now everyone knows that it is nonsense.

Now every one thinks that “you can’t just print money”. They think that it has to be’ borrowed’ from a private company named the Federal Reserve Board. It will probably take another 75 years for people to realize that the present system , requiring interest to function, will continue to cause Inflations and then crash and burn deflations , until the people see that money is man made, and can be created or destroyed, increased and decreased to suit the needs of a reasonable economy, and not the greed of the rich bankers

Jeff Riggenbach July 29, 2010 at 12:29 pm

“Where is Sam Konkin now?”

He died in Los Angeles in February 2004.

JR

Jim Davidson July 31, 2010 at 6:31 am

So he’s in heaven with Murray Rothbard. -smile-

billwald July 30, 2010 at 3:31 pm

>Now every one thinks that “you can’t just print money”. They think that it has to be’ borrowed’ from a private company named the Federal Reserve Board.

The US Treasury just printed 3 trillion dollars. It wasn’t borrowed from anyone. It is not generating interest which will have to be paid by the Treasury. It is not inflating the retail or wholesale markets. What, then, is it doing? It is buying stocks on the open market in the names of our (rich) owners and giving our owners more financial control over our lives.

Ben July 29, 2010 at 12:32 pm

The change will come when our public eduation system starts to educate youth on the real role of the federal reserve and the virtually unlimited power that it exhibits over our economy. I have nephews that are 9 and 12, they know NOTHING of how our nation formed, other than Christopher Columbus, the revolution, and then the freeing of the slaves. When I asked them why the civil war was fought, slavery is the answer. So long as our country continues to revise it’s history for the convenience of the current social argument, we will never truly be free. Those who do not study history as it actually happened are doomed to repeat it.

Dave Albin July 29, 2010 at 2:48 pm

Don’t wait for public education to do anything about it. Mr. Riggenbach and similar individuals provide the best knowledge base for you to do it yourself. Even the free-minded public school teachers are constantly shut down – follow the state-run lesson plan, or else!

Vanmind July 31, 2010 at 6:34 pm

Huh? The very essence of the public education system’s mandate is to keep everyone from ever learning about such governmental crime syndicates. Hell, public education was one of Marx’s oh-so-important Ten Planks For Destroying Civilization (so was central banking).

Rob July 29, 2010 at 3:06 pm

I live in NYC and on my morning commute I overheard an interesting comment from two elderly russian gentlemen. I speak russian so after listening a bit, on observing the mass of people blithely going to work without a genuine thought in their heads they simply said “Reminds you of communism doesn’t it”.

It’s a shame that this country, which had so much potential, is becoming the very thing that destroys the freedoms cherished by the founding fathers. Unfortunately only a minority, like Mr. Konkin see it.

Tony Flood July 30, 2010 at 8:15 am

Excellent history, Mr. Riggenbach.

Some readers may be interested in reading SEKIII’s exchange with Murray Rothbard on libertarian strategy.

billwald July 30, 2010 at 3:25 pm

Heinlein, like Michener, wrote a good story except for the last chapter. Neither knew how or when to quit.

Jim Davidson July 31, 2010 at 6:28 am

SEK3′s ideas are among those being taught and promoted at Individual Sovereign University. Our promotional slogan for 2010 is “Guidance on the path to agorism.” Many of us are very familiar with Sam’s work and associates. My own contact was limited to a very brief e-mail exchange with Sam near the turn of the millennium.

The strategy of agorism seems, to me, to contrast with the failed strategy of political reform and the dubious strategy of violent revolution. We have seen that counter economics was a significant factor in the collapse of the Soviet Union. I think that collapse played a significant role in the essentially open economy of China today – the PRC won’t be failing because its official economy can’t keep up. (It seems to be following the Soviet approach in repressing samizdat, which was another major factor in the end of the Soviet empire, I believe.)

Political reform has obviously failed utterly. Why? Well, the people who get to divvy up $3.8 trillion in stolen and borrowed money, this year (and about $1.5 trillion in borrowings in excess of deficits over the last two years) as well as hundreds of billions at the state and local level do not think the system is broken. They like it the way it is, and are going to fight, often using dirty means, to keep it the way it is.

Violent revolution seems to be tempting to many, including Tom Woods who seems to be pushing the nullification/secession rituals without any concern for the vast effusion of blood we may anticipate from these strategies. Unfortunately, as the Athenians and many others learned, a league strong enough to overthrow a tyrant may become dangerous itself to liberty. Certainly the American revolution was betrayed within about a decade of the Articles of Confederation. So one has to wonder what sort of thing would be powerful enough to replace the USA government without being even more dangerous to our freedoms.

Agorism avoids these options by rejecting political action and avoiding the state. It also fulfils the admonitions of Laozi and Etienne de la Boetie, among others, to withdraw support from tyranny rather than trying to confront it directly.

Tomás July 31, 2010 at 7:05 am

The whole Ron Paul debacle of 2008 really has thrown more into the agorism camp Jim. You’re absolutely right in that “the system” isn’t broken, it’s working exactly as planned, and any potential reform or creation of institutions competing with it (nullification/secession) will result in bloodshed. Doug Casey also has similar ideas in creating systems that run parallel and around “the system” with his Phyles.

It is of vital importance we create small voluntary social orders that will fill the vaccum of the State once it collapses or we’ll inherit the Mafia rule of Russia and Sicily.

Jim Davidson July 31, 2010 at 10:01 pm

Yes, Doug is a good guy, with many great ideas. Unfortunately, some of the people around him, notably Galland, are more “practical” than consistently ethical. So not everyone is welcome to form a phyle or buy a bit of ground at La Estancia. As Galland put it to me, were I to get involved he would see to it that there was nothing but a “taste of ashes” left for me. At this point the hostility is mutual.

Neither Russia nor Sicily are effective analogues. As far as I can tell, Russia never had a great tradition of individual liberty. It was a hierarchical society run by assholes long before the Bolsheviks and it should surprise no one that it is a hieararchical society run by assholes today. Sicily was a decent, learned trading culture around the time of Archimedes. But he was slaughtered by a Roman soldier. I’m not persuaded that the Italian renaissance was itself very egalitarian, nor that enlightenment gained a significant foothold in Sicily.

We do have some time, perhaps three years, to build the new society in the shell of the old as Sam wanted. And the state is going to collapse. What happens after that is going to peculiarly American. I would anticipate some prohibitionism, some Puritanism, some holy fervour. But there is also going to be a lot of armed individuals, some free love, and a great many intentional communities.

Mase Molina September 19, 2010 at 2:02 pm

The problems I see with agorism are
1) the agorist faces violence from two sides – the state and organized crime who may consider the agorist as competition when it comes to certain goods or services. The state will try to shut you down so you have to stay relatively small, and of course the state is always going after the little guy cus it’s easier to shut them down than it is to try going around shutting ,say, drug cartels down.

2) this is a subcategory of 1 actually – since getting bigger makes you more noticeable (to the state and to organized crime if you happen to provide services they do), you gotta stay small. This means that a second natural disadvantage agorist operations have is that they can’t get large enough to have the same economies of scale as businesses in the legal or “white” market. That means they are very likely to have a higher cost of production to businesses in the legal market.

Paul Stephens July 31, 2010 at 5:55 pm

Interesting history – almost a doppelganger for me in neighboring Montana (my father was actually working north of Edmonton in the 1960′s, when I was a UCLA student). I also knew Dana Rohrabacher, LeFevre, and met several other leading libertarians in LA during that time.
Social Credit is actually a very free-market system. And it was Social Credit leaders who first established Canada’s Single Payer healthcare as an alternative to centralized, bureaucratic socialized medicine like Britain’s. Of course, by now it is a public-private hybrid, but as originally conceived, it was entirely private. Only the “insurance” function was nationalized, so that everyone was covered regardless of ability to pay.
Now, Social Credit, where it exists (and it still gets a few votes), is considered very conservative. Henry Ford supported the basic concept all his life.

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: