You are born in a place and time not of your choosing. Growing up you learn about your surroundings, people and places. You are intelligent and start thinking about ideas, history, the world around you and your place in it.
Imagine all sources of information and knowledge are controlled by the state. The world you live in is the only alternative you know. You may have heard of other ones but you have no means of understanding them from the images and details that seep through. Most people around you form their views on the information that the state provides and controls. That means your parents, family, teachers, friends, colleagues… the entire society or what’s left of it. And, of course, there is an enemy out there, set on destroying the utopia the state is leading you to. Can’t trust the outside, they are devious and destructive. They are the enemy of freedom itself, as defined by the all-knowing and all-embracing state.
But as I said, you are intelligent and things don’t add up, your world doesn’t quite fit. This may happen to you as a teenager, when rebellion comes naturally but confidence to take it further often does not. You are not taken seriously and told to wait and see – life will teach you… Or it may come later in life, when the purpose of your everyday efforts suddenly escapes you and you feel the need to recapture it before it’s too late. Alas, you have a family, children, committments and a new set of insecurities collected over the years, that make you vulnerable and any deviation from the norm too risky.
If you are lucky, you have an aged relative or two who remember a different life, free and full of variety and perhaps can explain principles and rules other than those governing the claustrophobic world around you. You start thinking the unthinkable, you see the full horror of your existence and decide to fight the system. You go out in search of people like yourself in hope that you are not alone in your displacement.
Here the interesting part of the story ends. What comes next is dangerous, lonely, depressing, and often pointless.
You find an Underground, a Dissident Movement that may accept you and share with you the mindset and information you need to resist the state propaganda and its violence. You learn just how much of your life and personal details are monitored by the authorities and if you overstep the line, you abandon everything you have taken for granted. You live in pervasive fear and helplessness punctuated by an occassional underground meeting where you share a few political jokes and keep each other assured that it is not you who have gone insane but the society. For that is the main purpose of a dissident movement. Information, its dissemination and a chance to experience a collective spirit that helps you overcome the terrible sense of isolation.
Fear, clammy and unheroic, is your daily bread, not thoughts of liberty, of human rights and of making history. Oh yes, you dream of freedom but not in terms of lofty concepts of a freedom fighter. You want to learn, see and understand the world imagining how superior those who have the freedom to do so must be. They are free to read whatever they want and go wherever they want and so their knowledge and understanding must surpass yours.
And you wait, with the others, for something to help you change your world. You can’t do much, although you have already risked a lot. You wait for a spark, a collective project that would make your sacrifice meaningful. If the government is afraid to use brutal tactics (due to external pressure, no doubt), mass demonstrations and civil disobedience are a likely option. However, if the government is brutal beyond restraint, then your only salvation is help from the outside.
My question to all those who believe in liberty and the rights of the individual and all things beautiful: would you really fight for them? Would you be willing to put your life and perhaps the lives of your loved ones at risk and do so without any guarantee of success? Would you be ready to shed your blood in the name of liberty without knowing whether you are making history or just adding to the list of nameless victims of the tyranny? Would you be able to remain certain that you are right and that everybody else is wrong when the only world you know is the one where they are right? Because those are the choices you have before you, not one of clarity and moral certitude, supported by intellectual arguments and discourse. Every act of resistance, however insignificant on the large scale, is a small victory for sanity and human spirit. But more often than not, it is not enough to defeat the enemy.
The nature of tyranny in places like Iraq and North Korea is one of unrestrained brutality and although they may collapse economically one day, like the Soviet Union did, ultimately it is not just a matter of brave local people standing up for what is right: in such places to do that is tantamount to suicide… the state must be decapitated and realistically that will only happen via foreign military action of some sort (either military aid or outright invasion).
One could argue that it is not the responsibility of foreign taxpayers to free others from tyranny and perhaps this is true, but do not kid yourself that this is a ‘pro-liberty’ response. The US and British Armies cannot impose liberty in Iraq, only the Iraqi’s can do that, but foreign armies can destroy tyranny.
Free Iraq.
I’m not sure what to say so I’ll just say what comes to mind. Yes I would fight. I would try not to get my family involed for it would be better for them not to be. I would fight for my freedom no matter what happens I will always survive and come back even stronger. I will sacrifice every thing so that my children wouldn’t have to live their lives the way I did. I would do it all I would cause a war if I had to. I would do any thing for what I believe in because that’s just the way I am.
I certainly agree with Gabriel (and Perry in an earlier post) that by far and away the best justification for the use of force in Iraq is that it may help to bring about the conditions for more liberty to people presently suffering under tyranical regimes.
Nevertheless, given the dangers involved in supporting the use of State force as an engine of liberty (perilously close to being a contradiction in terms?), surely as Libertarians we need some criteria to enable us to draw the line? Otherwise, we would end up supporting foreign adventures in dozens of countries round the world, with all the consequential expansion of State power which that would entail.
I don’t know what those criteria ought to be, but as a Libertarian my inclination is to make the intervention threshhold a pretty high one. I would also put the burden on those why seek to justify intervention, to do so in compelling terms.
And my gut feeling is that the case of Iraq just doesn’t qualify. I admit almost complete ignorance on the subject, but surely there is a difference between the regime in a place like Iraq and the regime in a place like N Korea?
Iraq looks like a fairly standard third world Kleptocracy run for the benefit of the resident dictator, his family and his chums. Being an Iraqi must be a pretty miserable business, but I guess if you keep your head down it is probably no more miserable than being a Syrian, an Algerian or a Zimbabwean (to name but a few). At least in Iraq there are shops and markets and stuff like that.
N Korea, on the other hand, sounds like a desperate place. On a par with Ukraine in the 1930’s (or perhaps Cambodia during the worst years of the Khmer Rouge). A place where people face state-enforced servitude or death by starvation.
I can see a compelling case for intervention in cases like N Korea (albeit that N Korea itself is untouchable for obvious reasons). I don’t see that the case is anything like so compelling in relation to places like Iraq which have numerous counterparts all round the world.
Gabriel,
An excellent, thought-provoking post.
I wish I knew I would have both the insight to accurately discern whether I were in such a situation and, if so, the valor to stand up against it.
The lamentable truth is that I would probably find it both easier to discern tyranny, as well as having the courage to resist it, in another society than in my own.
Nevertheless, if my own society were so plagued, I suspect that my stubbornness would probably find some outlet in resistance even if it didn’t amount to taking up arms. My nature is such that I would probably engage more in subtler subversions and sabotage than in the blazing, heroic gestures of the classic freedom-fighter motif.
cydonia,
The case against Iraq is very simple: it is dangerous to it’s neighbors. Gabriel makes the case that Iraqui people are oppressed and deserve outside help. That is certainly true, and provides a moral basis for intervention. But that is not the whole truth: add to that the danger to other countires, to the stability of the whole region. This danger is very real: Saddam is not like the sultan of Burkina-Faso (which likewise loves fancy palaces) – Saddam has started two major wars of aggresion that cost hundreds of thousands of lives, in a very volatile part of the world.
“Iraq looks like a fairly standard third world Kleptocracy ” –
This is manifestly not true – hundreds of thousands of dead people prove that.
(BTW – your email, as posted, seems to be mistaken, check it).
Poland had outside help throwing off communism but, it wasn’t massive state help. It was, for example, trade unions in the U.S. sending money, radios, and other “stuff” to the shipworkers’ union.
Who-in-the-world can connect to what-in-the-world in Iraq?
Perhaps when we look at improving liberty in places like Iraq we’re looking at the wrong problem. I think maybe the correct place to fight is at the margins, in places where people have some liberty that can be leveraged into more. Places like Egypt, Israel/Palestine, Turkey, and Iran come to mind. Resistance to tyranny probably could get the most “bang for the buck” in these places.
Amusingly, the USG has a lot of leverage over many of these places (not Iran) by virtue of the massive foreign aid these places get. What I’d like to see is the USG telling Egypt and Israel, “Clean up your act and give your people more freedom, or we’ll stop giving you money.” For some reason the heroic liberators in charge of the USG don’t seem interested in this.
There are two things I must relate to you before I tell you about the night of the Muslims.
All of these things transpired within a six-month period.
I will tell u about a nightmare I had and then Muslims who came and snuck around my house and stole stuff out of my rubbish bins.
The Nightmare:
Like most dreams, the nightmare was kind of stupid. The only reason I am reporting it is because it is most likely related because of the buzzing sound the night the Muslims came.
In the Nightmare, I was hiding beneath the floorboards of a building somewhere.
I could see the space above the floorboards through the cracks between the boards. Above the floor was an object that I remember being similar to an upright vacuum cleaner. On it’s front side was a very bright light. It was searching for me, and I was hiding. It made a loud buzzing sound. The same sound I heard the night of the Muslims.
I have been plagued off and on through out my life by libertarianism. To me libertarianism is like a semi-conscious, almost trance like state, other times I remember nothing at all. I have even hurt myself running in my sleep. Libertarianism is a very bizarre experience.
My memory of the night of the Muslims is rather blurred. I was in the familiar trance like state while a helicopter was flying extremely close to the house and shining its lights in the window. This also woke up my girlfriend.
The really bizarre part of this incident was that I was crouched down near the floor, near the window, yelling at my girlfriend to get down.
I was extremely afraid and very panicked. She later told me that I kept telling her that”They were going to get us”.I do not remember how this episode ended.
A few months after Sept 11 I had the most bizarre experience of my life.
I awoke; around Three O-clock AM, to some noise or activity outside my window.
My first impression was that someone was messing with my car outside, however I did not get up to look out.
I felt as though there was a crowd outside my window. I remember thinking that if I was quiet, and did not move, they would not know I was there.
Fear set in. I knew it was Muslims.
About this time I started to hear a very strange buzzing noise. It was very faint at first but grew louder with each passing second. It soon became very loud, almost loud enough to vibrate objects in the room.
I continued to lie very still. My heart was beating very loud and my body was full of adrenaline. I was both absolutely terrified and totally in awe. I knew what was happening. As I lay on the bed, I watched the sky through the Venetian blinds.
They were open wide enough to see the outside sky very clearly.
As the buzzing grew louder, I saw a triangle shaped craft slowly appear, turn, and head towards my house from the corner of the block. It had three lights. One up front, and two at the back to form a triangle.
It reminded me of a helicopter without rotors. It continued in my direction until it was almost just passed the window.
It is here that the memory ends. I awoke nearly an hour and fifteen minutes later. Everything was back to normal.
I have a small image in my memory of seeing this thing up close. Near one of it’s lights. It was a dull flat black color with very little shine.
It appeared to be held together by rivets.
I do very much feel that this was not a dream, as I was too full of adrenaline to be asleep. The event seemed too real.
I fell to my knees and prayed to Jesus.
And thanked him I was free.
——————————————————-
Love Jesus like you Love Yourself
ms4jesus.blogspot.com
Jacob
Sorry about the email. Should have been co.uk (not com).
Re your comments
Increasing liberty is one thing – I acknowledge this as a (indeed the only) legitimate foreign policy goal for libertarians. I just question what the criteria should be for deciding whether to support State intervention in a particular case.
However, danger posed to Iraq by its neighbours strikes me as a much weaker justification:
1. There is then no question of self-defence involved (or if it is a form of self-defence, it is an over-extended version of it), nor any question of achieving more liberty. I doubt that liberty in Iraq would have been enhanced if the West had supported Iran in their war, or vice versa.
2. Nor are there any decent criteria for deciding which side to back. The Iran / Iraq war was the main cause of the hundreds of thousands of deaths to which you refer. Should the West have backed one or other side in that war? If yes, which side and by reference to what liberty-enhancing criteria?
3. If Iraq poses a threat to its neighbours, the obvious retort is that it is for those neighbours to deal with the threat. I have no particular problem with Arabia or the Gulf States paying for Western arms or mercenaries as long as they are going to be used for self-defence rather than domestic oppression, but I don’t see why I should be forced to pay for it.
In totalitarian societies it is not how many times you fall down that counts; it’s getting up again. And forget counting, it’s too pedantic and after the first hundred, you loose track anyhow. Our ability to be imbued with such goodness and yet have a capacity for such evil is neverm greater than under the regimes who pretend to have the monopoly on truth…
OK, it’s not like it’s Page One of the New York Times, but a preview of my falls got written up in the Sydney Morning Herald.
Still blood talks a lot louder than any words do.
Gabriel Syme wrote: “My question to all those who believe in liberty and the rights of the individual and all things beautiful: would you really fight for them?”
I believe there are more efficient ways of promoting liberty in totalitarian states than sending armed forces or writing emotional articles for fellow libertarians/neolibertarians on Internet. In 2002 I made two trips to North Korea, where I was giving lectures in market economy for North Korean economists, bureaucrats, etc.
I find Mr Syme’s point quite contradictory to the philosophy of classical liberalism and libertarianism. Why should the US and British taxpayers be responsible for providing a good which could be provided by the free market?
I am not trying to exaggerate my own part of making North Korea a better place to live in. However, there are thousands of entrepreneurs, from Europe, USA, China, South Korea, Japan, Australia, etc., who are already risking their lives in North Korea trying to make a profit. These people are the real heroes, and similar to the Vietnamese and Chinese experience these people, not American or British soldiers, will be the ones who make a difference in the ongoing fight for liberty. Anyone familiar with the notion of “crowding out” in economics should be able to figure out the effect on foreign investments of an invasion.
I find the words “Free Iraq” and “Free North Korea” very beautiful and compelling indeed, but my solution does not include the sacrifice of innocent civilians in either of these countries:
Make money, not war!
Fabian Wallen: By ‘fight’, I meant any resistance at all to a totalitarian state, not necessarily armed forces. If you read my blog carefully, you’d find that I am describing how an individual may perceive oppression by such state pointing out how near impossible it may be to ‘fight’ it in the conventional sense of the word. And I certainly do not argue for promotion of liberty by the armed forces, merely for removal of tyranny by force. I can’t see any other way, despite your heroic business efforts.
I am surprised you find my blog emotional, that was not its intention at all, merely a look at a position of an individual in a totalitarian state from the inside. I think many libertarians forget how limited information and statist propaganda can affect even a rational mind.
Please explain how can a free market provide anything in places such as North Korea, Iraq or other totalitarian regimes. There is no free market there and that is why I advocate removal of those who inhibit its functioning.
However, there are thousands of entrepreneurs, from Europe, USA, China, South Korea, Japan, Australia, etc., who are already risking their lives in North Korea trying to make a profit.
I find the above sentence profoundly absurd, can you please elaborate on how this is done!
By the way, you are in fact subsidising the inhumane regime of North Korea since the credit from any benefit derived from your entrepreneurial endevours will, of course, be claimed by the communist regime and thus assist them in perpetuating the horror of their rule.
If one is not willing to relocate, to increase liberty; it is highly unlikely one would be willing to fight in armed resistence.
Disident resistence is quite likely from most Libertarians — including many self-interested compromising betrayals by one Lib or another.
The Lib “pure” philosophy certainly accepts self-defense. What is obvous is that there is honest disagreement about 1) whether attacking Iraq is really part of self-defense, and 2) whether supporting a LARGER & more POWERFUL state, in order to provide better “self-defense”, is really the most liberty enhancing activitiy freedom lovers can now do.
For myself, while I’m comfortable supporting (1) in theory, the reality of (2), with a US state rapidly increasing its power, makes me question the dogma/ authority of self defense.
As an unmarried childless man, I might have fought (I DID join the US Naval Academy to fight) for freedom — with a wife and child I certainly WOULD NOT.
Good article.
Gabriel Syme wrote: ”By the way, you are in fact subsidising the inhumane regime of North Korea since the credit from any benefit derived from your entrepreneurial endevours will, of course, be claimed by the communist regime and thus assist them in perpetuating the horror of their rule.”
It is a pretty harsh accusation against a libertarian to state that he is in fact subsidizing a totalitarian communist regime. First of all, I did not get a cent (not even a North Korean Won) from the North Korean government. Secondly, I did not give a cent to the North Korean government. Thirdly, please explain to me how giving speeches on the advantages of free trade and a market economy in general to North Korean economists could possibly subsidize an inhumane regime.
North Korea is a 100 percent planned economy, with a not so insignificant informal sector. Nevertheless, the country has been experimenting with free trade zones, ie in Rajin-Sonbong, since the early 1990’s. This development seems to continue. During the last couple of years the number of entrepreneurs from other countries who are trading with North Korean institutions has been on a steady increase. The Pyongyang Gymnasium, which is being built by Hyundai, is expected to be completed in January. Hyundai is simultaneously building an industrial complex in the new free trade zone Kaesong. Further, the people of North Korea is starting to demand foreign goods. According to the South Korean trade and investment promotion agency KOTRA, North Korean imports have grown by 58 percent between 1998 and 2001. Coca Cola took its first step into North Korea in June 2000. As of July 2002 the people of North Korea are given the right to trade with one another in small local farm markets. As the universities and governmental institutions get access to Internet later on this year, if nothing unexpected happens, the pace of change will most certainly increase.
However, I do agree on the fact that there is not any true free market in North Korea. But if the relatively free (and peaceful) markets of its trading partners can help reforming the system, why should we send armed forces trying to invade the country? Do you really think it is worth the cause to sacrifice young American and British soldiers and North Korean civilians?
If you find my information disturbing, do not hesitate to give your own embassy a call and check the facts:
British Embassy
Munsu Dong District
Pyongyang
Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.
Tel: +850 2 381 7980/4
Fax: +850 2 381 7985
Fabian:
I am sure upsetting you was not the intention, Fabian
I do not doubt you are telling the truth, but by contributing to the weal of the North Korean state, you are indeed aiding and abetting the North Korean state, and thus are indeed ‘subsidising’ it, albeit not in a literal sense (i.e. by giving it money). I think Gabriel’s point is that the regime will take the credit for any economic benefits your efforts yield, spinning it as ‘yet more goodness brought to you by Big Brother’.
Certainly it would be hard to criticize you for doing that!
I do not think anyone at Samizdata.net would suspect your motives, Fabian, and I do not doubt you libertarian sensibilities for one moment… but whether or not having dealings with the North Korean regime is the best way to liberate the people of North Korea from the nightmare in which they live, well, I do think we differ fairly radically on that. I would love to believe you are correct but I rather suspect you are not. Educating a select audience to the benefits of free markets are likewise unlikely to impact on their nuclear weapons programme.
Perry de Havilland: Well, I am aware of the fact that we differ on how to liberate the North Korean people. However, we need to remember that it is quite easy to sit here in Europe and have opinions on how to solve problems on the Korean Peninsula, thousands and thousands of miles away? It seems as if the sacrifice of a couple of thousand North Korean civilians is a price you are willing to pay for a successful invasion of the country. But, are you sure that such an invasion would be successful? Contrary to the situation in Iraq, most observers argue that the North Korean army is extremely faithful to its leader, Kim Jong-Il. How many American and British soldiers are you willing to sacrifice for the sake of a free North Korea? Furthermore, considering the fact that Seoul is situated only 30 miles south of the demilitarized zone, how many South Koreans are you willing to sacrifice for the sake of your freedom war?
You wrote: “I think Gabriel’s point is that the regime will take the credit for any economic benefits your efforts yield, spinning it as ‘yet more goodness brought to you by Big Brother’.”
Er, sorry… but how could the current regime take any credit for my speeches and lectures on the advantages of free trade and capitalism? Still, if it would take credit for my work, would that not be a huge step in the right direction?
The logic conclusion of your reasoning is that it was a mistake of the United States to lift the trade embargo against Vietnam in February 1994, and that the US embargo against Cuba is a rewarding policy. The people of dictatorships such as Cuba, Iraq, and North Korea need more contact with the outside world, not less. In addition, I think it is impossible for any planned economy to successfully compete with its products on the global market. Hence, deregulation and economic reform is a necessary step in order to avoid famine and economic crises. The Vietnamese development serves as a pretty good example.
Fabian:
Two questions.
Is it possible that we see the first signs of capitalism penetrating, creeping, into North Korea – the way it did into China two decades ago, under a totalitarian regime ? I imagine this is a possibility, since Korea might feel China’s inluence. This might be a promissing developement, little known to us.
The second question is about “doing bussiness” there: in the third world doing bussiness menas first of all bribing (and therefore supporting) the rulers. Is that the case in North Korea too ?
Jacob: I would say that some, small but important, market economic tendencies can be seen on the micro economic level in North Korea.
Since only a few years back in time, North Koreans have been able to buy and sell vegetables, grain, and similar necessities on local marketplaces. On these markets US dollars are typically used, and if dollars are not available people tend to use an unofficial exchange rate (the official exchange rate of 150 Won/USD is significantly overvalued, and to make matters worse, the use of USD is officially forbidden since only a couple of months ago). As a shipment of grain, usually funded by a humanitarian organization or other NGO, reaches a nearby port the price of grain at the local markets tend to decrease. Supply and demand, man.
Recently the government has consigned the management of so-called commodity stores to wealthy foreign individuals. Most of the commodities are imported, often relatively cheap Chinese goods, such as clothes, shoes and food. However, you can also find Western goods, typically cigarettes, beer, candy, and sodas. The managers of the stores pay a certain amount of money to the government, but they get to keep some of their income for management of the store and personal living expenses.
In the spring of 2002 the very first Internet café was opened in Pyongyang in a joint venture between North Korea and a South Korean software company. However, the prices are extremely high compared with normal price levels in the rest of Asia or Europe. Nevertheless, despite the fact that it is extremely exclusive, the existence of a Internet café is a progress in itself.
Driving along the countryside you observe two very interesting details. First of all, it has begun to appear small cigarette and vegetable stands along the dusty country roads. Secondly, 95 percent of the arable land along the roads is colorless and seems totally infertile. But every once in a while you notice a little green spot, usually very close to a small house/cabin or close to the typical shabby apartment building. Since the mid 1990´s, North Koreans are allowed to grow a small amount of vegetables and grains, still mainly for personal use.
I do not have any experience with bribery and I have not heard any particular story about bribery in North Korea. However, I would be surprised if bribery is not used sometimes, which is often the case in third world countries or in Western countries when it comes down to doing business with public institutions. I guess it is also a question of definition; is a bottle of Scotch a bribe or simply a gift?
In North Korea I talked with people who had experience with China in the early 1980’s, who all said that the North Korean development of today is quite similar to the one in China a couple of decades ago. Since 1978 China has had an annual economic growth of almost 10 percent, and it is not difficult to find compact discs of Chinese punk bands singing ‘We don’t need your f****ng rules’ in downtown Beijing (trust me, I found one). There are clear signs that the economic as well as the political freedom in China has increased a lot since the late 1970’s.
I would not be surprised if you would be able to buy compact discs of North Korean punk bands in 10-20 years from now…
We did not need an American invasion of China in order to get economic reform. And the American attempt to free Vietnam surely did not help the situation of that country. Nevertheless, we have seen some important economic reforms in Vietnam during the past decade. Similarly, an American invasion of North Korea is not needed and could even be counterproductive.
Fabian,
Thanks for the info. Interesting.
By the way – nobody is talking about an American invasion of North Korea. Not even Perry de Havilland, I think. Not that liberating the Koreans would be morally wrong, but it is not practical. Too expensive in lives and money, too many risks.
Jacob,
No problemo. I’m glad we all agree then. But, wouldn´t the “removal of tyranny by force” require an invasion?
(Gabriel Syme wrote: And I certainly do not argue for promotion of liberty by the armed forces, merely for removal of tyranny by force. I can’t see any other way, despite your heroic business efforts.)
Fabian,
Could you please tell us more about the free trade zones in North Korea ? Are they relly free, completeley free? What volume and kind of activity takes place there ?
About removing tyranny by force – sometimes revolutions are necessary, and though many people might die fighting, it is preferable to a prolonged period of oppression and slavery. It would be nice if there were some kind of revolution in NK, with or without outside help, and the Dear Leader would dissappear. But that is just dreaming, it won’t happen. What will happen only prophets know, but one thing i’ll venture to predict: America will not invade NK.
saddam is gay.