For my final post-Cato University post, I will look at some of the posts by other attendees.#

Michael Williams writes about an alternative conception of the original of natural rights.#

Essentially: natural rights are those liberties which are easier to protect than to take away. For example, it's difficult for government or individuals to control what I think, and it's easy for me to resist or ignore any laws restricting my thoughts; therefore, freedom of thought is a natural right. On the other hand, it's easy for an individual or government to thwart my alleged "right" to have someone else pay for my health care. Thus, the first is a natural right, and the second is not.

Now certainly sufficient force can be applied to create any "right" one may desire, but force is in limited supply and can't be used for everything. Witness the former USSR, and how difficult it was to use force to restrict private property rights. On the contrary, in America very little force is required to protect private property rights.

There are very interesting comments on this post.

My main thought is: Does this mean that technology that makes more things possible degrades our natural rights and that they are dependent on time and technology? Furthermore, is the universality of such rights important? For example, if there a three people (A, B, and C) where A is fantastically powerful, B moderately powerful, and C weak. If A and B band together to take everything from C, because it easy to do so is that okay? Or is it not okay because taking everything from someone is not something easily accessible universally?

Michael Williams posted his letter to the sponsors.#

Andrew Moroz writes about the week:#

The overall theme of the seminar can be summarized by the following anecdote:

Suppose you, an upstanding and honest citizen, find yourself in a back alley. Suddenly, nine thugs appear and notice the fat wallet in your back pocket. Not being criminals, they do not simply rob you. Rather, they tell you the whole group will now have an impromptu vote; the matter for consideration is, naturally, the "excess" money by which you are burdened. As you might expect, this totally democratic process results in a 9-to-1 decision to redistribute your wealth. Since you resist, they proceed to use "reasonable" force (backed by the popular will) to hold you down, take your money, and put it in their own pockets. All of this is democratically supported, naturally.

Implied Dissent writes about it as well.#

Michael Williams comments on the necessity of the struggle for liberty and the impossibility of it being permanently protected by institutions:#

One of the things that bothers me a bit about libertarians is that they're deathly afraid of slippery slopes. I agree that they're something to be wary of, but as Eugene Volokh has argued many times, sliding down a slope isn't inevitable. Libertarians want to create a world in which government is so limited that they'll never have to fight for liberty again, but fighting for liberty is inescapable. I'd rather work for the best good (life, liberty, etc.) now, even if it means we'll have to fight against a slope a little more later on. We can win now, and we can win later, because we're right.

After Cato University, the scholarship students were asked to write a letter to their sponsor, this is what I wrote:#

Dear Cato Sponsor,#

After a week it is clear that Cato University is the program that I had been looking for through the last few years of my life, and I am not an old person. From the time I started college I had been looking for meaning conversation and debate about those issues that I cared about, and a taste of issues that might pique my interest. The Cato University lecturers and the other attendees provided for this desire.#

In my every-day interactions with other intelligent people my debates have primarily revolved around those basic issues that socials and capitalists disagree on, and often became incredibly unproductive after the first few rounds. During the past week, I have had more engaging and productive debates than in the last year aggregated. This is not only because we tend to agree on basic principles (which isn't always true), but because the atmosphere promotes such an assumption and encourages thoughtful devil's advocates.#

To explain, I will first cite something Tom G. Palmer, the director, and some of the other presenters, said about discussing liberty with students, university professors, and others. He said that it is not our job to convert people. People do not like being converted. And why should we want to necessarily? Is it not better for people to come to liberty by the influence of their own liberty? When David Schmidtz spoke about this, he said that he believes in intellectual freedom and does not promote a particular philosophy to his students, but allows them to formulate on their own. A corollary to this guideline is taking on the "opponent" with their most powerful argument, rather than a straw man. This intellectual integrity is described by Susan Chamberlin as one of the missions of the Cato Institute.#

The relation of these two ideas is something that I came to realize at Cato University, and this realization alone would be worthwhile even if I did not have access to the other exciting topics, intelligent new friends, amazing scenery, and fabulous vacation activities. The relation is such: You cannot cultivate your mind without respectful disagreement and discussion. (I found this best expressed in David S. Landes' quotation of David Gans in The Wealth and Poverty of Nations: "As David Gans, an early seventeenth-century popularizer of natural science, put it, one knows that magic and diving are not science because their practitioners do not argue with one another. Without controversy, no serious pursuit of knowledge and truth." (p. 203)) But you cannot do this when assuming that the purpose of your discussion is to conquer and convert your "opponent," this outlook cannot foster the needed respect. Like trade, conversation should be a win-win situation with both sides gaining cultivation of mind. As a result, since I agree with the view that the purpose of our life is to "cultivate our gardens" (or make ourselves free to do so,) it is not a responsibility of the libertarian or free-market economist to convert--only engage.#

I am profoundly grateful for this gift and hope to make my return to the favour bank in the future.#

When re-writing this I noticed some stupid mistakes and strange phrasings. I feel like an idiot for not submitting it in better form. C'est la vie.#

Ever since I got back from Cato University I have been meaning to go through and write some notes about what I thought about it. That time has come. These notes are not thorough, mainly I present the general topic and some thoughts I had about it.#

Liberty and Human Progress, by Tom G. Palmer#

This talk focused on how capitalism has progress humanity and how it is grounded in individual liberty.#

Property, Contract, and Free Society, by Marcus Cole#

This talk focused on intellectual property issues of patents and copyrights. Identified a problem with the current regime, (see this search), and proposed that another system could be based not on monopolistic State-sponsored coercion, but just on series of contracts to define acceptable uses of products and property.#

The Economics of Progress and Prosperity, by Richard Stroup#

This talk focused on how individual liberty correlates well with economic growth, but not necessarily democracy, although political freedom is often a result of economic growth. Also mentioned was the historical statistic on the growth of environmental regulation with economic growth.#

The Historical Struggle for Liberty, 2300 BC-1776 AD, by Tom G. Palmer#

A survey of the history of liberty. Very entertaining and pleasing. The universal desire for freedom and its ability to solve problems was apparent. Funny advice: "Don't get conquered by nomads." (In reference to the Mongols.)#

Although, I wonder how this advice applies to getting conquered by people who wish to live like nomads?#

Markets and Morality, by Jane Shaw#

1776: The Revolution that Changed the World, by Robert McDonald#

This talk focused on the philosophic foundation of the American revolution and some interesting details of its operation.#

Law and Order without Coercion, by Marcus Cole#

This talk surveyed some historic examples of when things were provided for privately without coercion that are commonly thought of as the province of government action.#

• A book on reputation, an important factor in law and order without coercion.
• Price Fishback wrote about how coal companies in West Virginia provided better schools for blacks than the government, so good that the whites wanted to get in, but couldn't. The paper.
• George A. Selgin has written about truly free banking systems in history.
• Lisa Bernstein writes about the private court system that the diamond trade uses in the paper, Opting Out of the Legal System: Extralegal Contractual Relations in the Diamond Industry.
• Harry Chase Brearly has written about the private formation of Underwriters' Laboratories. Google it.

The Economics of Waste and Poverty, by Richard Stroup#

Constitutional Law: Enumerated Powers and Unenumerated Rights, by Marcus Cole#

In this talk, Cole described the architecture of the court system today and how it differs from that proposed by the Constitution, highlighting the court decisions where the interpretation was radically changed. And interesting example was when a Supreme Court ruled that a law was constitutional because the Constitution said "necessary" not "absolutely necessary", despite protests from the Framers on the side against this interpretation.#

Later, I asked Cole about whether the Declaration of Independence can be or has been used in court decisions. He said that while it is not officially acknowledged as law, it has been used in interpreting the Constitution, and some Supreme Court Justices (Clarence Thomas, for example) have stated that they see the two as equals. And it is sometimes referred to in dissenting opinions of the Supreme Court, but not in majority decisions.#

(One reference was footnote 4 of the Carolene Products case that advised courts to assume Congress' laws are Constitutional, rather than the reference.)#

Risk and Freedom, by Richard Stroup#

This talk focused on the ways that humans manage risk and gave examples of government trying to manage risk and causing problems in addition to the eroding of liberty. A particular example that sticks out is how many people, on average, die from the delays introduced by the FDA.#

Mayans and Markets: The Universality of Free Enterprise, by Estuardo Zapeta#

Estuardo described an interesting group of native Indians of Central America who engage, and have engaged for quite sometime, in a market based economy very successfully. Much reference was made to Hernando de Soto's work.#

Liberty in Post-Dictatorial Society, by Piotr Kaznacheev#

This talk described the ways that different former Soviet countries have converted from communism and detailed the success stories.#

Utility, Goodness, and Rights, by David Schmidtz#

This talk focused on the philosophical ideas of utility, goodness, and rights. I am going to buy one of his books for deeper understanding.#

Into Africa: How Property Protects Wildlife, by David Schmidtz and Elizabeth Willott#

In this talk, the presenters discussed the ways in which private property rights on animals and territory in Africa have protected wildlife, while common liberal intervention policies have caused more harm. More information available from The Property and Environmental Research Center.#

Law and Economics of the Regulatory State, by Marcus Cole#

In this talk, Marcus Cole described how the judiciary system of common law is very similar to a market, and used this comparison to suggest that it is often better at harnessing information than a legislature and thus leads to better laws. Better being defined as more inline with the expectations of the people and the constraints of natural rights.#

The American Struggle Against Slavery and for Equal Rights, by Robert McDonald#

In this talk, Robert McDonald dealt with the apparent hypocrisy of slavery during and after the American Revolution. Obviously there is a lot to say about this, but I get the feeling that Tocqueville, and others, describe it best by saying it was recognized as a problem but one that would have to be solved after the bigger problem of a stable republic.#

Liberty and the Ethics of Accomplishment, by Nathaniel Branden#

This talk was focused towards the strange measurement of accomplishment that opponents of capitalism have and alternative measurements. Something that stands out is his comment that the majority of statues and monuments are dedicated to mass murders and dictators, rather than to businessmen and innovators who are the real reason for human progress and prosperity.#

A great comment: "The one good thing about communists and socialists is that the eventually die and kill each other."#

Experimental Economics and Freedom, by David Schmidtz#

This talk dealt with experiments in economic reasoning based on psychological methods. He seemed to think it was most important because it enabled economists to give some of their theories a "chance to fail," rather than taking the ostrich approach.#

The New Deal, the Great Society, and the American Megastate, by Robert McDonald#

In this talk, Robert McDonald talked about the ways in which FDR turned his back on the Constitution and is the root of many of the problems of the modern American "Megastate."#

Legislators, Lobbyists, and Think Tanks, by Susan Chamberlin#

Susan Chamberlin discussed the role of libertarians in Washington, DC. The overall theme was that the system is as bad as you imagine it is, although maybe just a little bit better. For this reason, the audience of most libertarian activism is not usefully focused on politicians, but on helping change the minds of people. I was reminded of Nathaniel Branden's comment. (See above.)#

Libertarian Citizenship, by Deroy Murdock#

Deroy Murdock talked about how to live a good libertarian life based on mutual respect and really supporting the freedom that we espouse.#

Advancing Liberty by Winning Arguments and Making Friends and Allies, by Tom G. Palmer#

This talk dealt with some of the issues of Murdock's talk with an added emphasis on supporting intellectual freedom and carrying oneself well in discussion. It helps no one to insult and batter a socialist in argument, not only will that person hate you, but also your ideas. It takes hard work and patience to be polite and convincing but it should pay off.#

I was reminded of this talk when I told a friend that other day that it would be a lot easier to promote libertarianism by advocating libertarian propaganda, control of schools, and violent revolution. But those things are in opposition to everything liberty stands for. Unfortunately for expediency, you can't force understanding and agreement, but fortunately for the long-term viability, people can't fake that belief.#

Tomorrow morning I leave for Cato University in San Diego for the week. I plan on taking notes and sharing my thoughts about the experience afterwards or during, depending on the availability of internet access.#

Cato University's 2004 Summer Seminar is a weeklong intellectual feast. Come expand your horizons, make new friends, renew your commitment to liberty, and hone your skills as an advocate for freedom.

Rediscover your passion: Remember the excitement of reading Milton Friedman, Ayn Rand, Thomas Jefferson, or F. A. Hayek for the first time? At Cato University, you can rekindle that spark. Imagine all your favorite subjects, taught by people who understand liberty, in the company of others who love to think and learn about freedom. Whether you're new to classical liberal thought or an expert looking for a refresher, Cato University will reinvigorate your passion for liberty.

Learn from the best: At Cato University, you'll spend a week learning from leading scholars and professors. Attend lively and thought-provoking lectures on history, economics, law, and philosophy, as well as discussions inside and outside the classroom. Chat about ideas with your favorite speaker at lunch on the patio or over cocktails before dinner. Cato University is more than just books and lectures-it's an intellectual excursion with some of liberty's greatest contemporary thinkers.

Also of interest is the schedule.#