SFE and Students for Liberty co-hosted the first Midwest Students for Freedom conference at the University of Michigan on Saturday.

50 of the best and brightest students in the region came to hear from 13 different presenters on how to communicate, market and spread freedom in the academic, political, cultural and “new media” (that’s you bloggers and YouTubers) realm.  The day was jam-packed with great info and presentations, and I know I gained a lot of knowledge on how to improve in our efforts to spread the wonderful ideas of liberty.

A few pictures:

Find more videos like this on Bureaucrash Social

Joe is a hero because he’s an outlaw.  He is (horror!) practicing his personal liberty to offer plumbing services without groveling at the feet of some state board of plumbing.  I also heard that he’s not registered to vote, to which some radio commentator acted offended that he dare to question a candidate if he’s not interested in politics enough to vote.  I think Joe has good reason to ignore politics.  No politicians from any party is going to help Joe achieve his dreams; he’s gotta do that on his own, hoping governments at all levels will simply leave him alone.  Oh that he were as fortunate.

(Here’s an article about how dumb non-voluntary professional licensing is, and who it’s really for).

The 2008 Students for Freedom Conference is less than a month away.  This event, a one-day deal with all meals provided as well as some great materials, will be a one-of-a-kind experience featuring some truly great minds in the battle for liberty.  The 12 speakers will be presenting on how to effectively spread the ideas of liberty through writing, blogging, video, events in the political, academic and cultural spheres and more.

For me, trying to discover how to fight against the overwhelming tendency to let “liberty yield” is a consuming passion.  Every time I see news stories, movies, books, advertisements, etc. that elevate the government and, often unknowingly, denigrate liberty I wonder how we can fight it.  How can liberty overcome the forces of big government, special interests, apathy, and the desires of silver-tongued and power-hungry politicians?  There is a way.

In fact, if you look back on the history of the world you can see a general movement toward liberty.  Even something as reprehensible as slavery was around in this country not 200 years ago.  But the movement towards liberty did not happen overnight, or inevitably.  It took relentless effort by intellectual and cultural movers and shakers to awaken people from the slumber of servitude to the pure air of freedom.  From thinkers like John Locke to pamphleteers like Thomas Paine to novelists like Ayn Rand to economists like Milton Friedman to reporters like John Stossel; the defense and advance of liberty is forged by the efforts of those who have not only dedication, but insight into the most effective means of reaching their fellow man.  The beauty is, there isn’t just one way.  The individuals listed found their unique talent and passion and applied it in a way that only they could.

I want to be one of those voices for freedom.  So do you.  The Students for Freedom Conference is a phenomenal way to start honing your ability to advance the precious idea of liberty in whatever sphere you are most capable.  The speakers are wholeheartedly advancing liberty, each in their own sphere, and they are taking an entire day to share with us what they’ve learned.  I do not want to miss it, and neither do you.

Register online here.

Until I get the blog promotion function working properly, I will simply resort to re-posting user blogs on the homepage via cut and paste.  Here’s a good one from SFE blogger nstano:

An article I wrote over at Mises.org:

As the presidential election nears, I hear more people voicing their fear over the prospect of the other candidate winning. People from both major parties express genuine trepidation at the thought of a world without their candidate as commander in chief. Both sides believe we will lose our freedom if the wrong party wins.

Perhaps surprisingly, I think there’s a lesson to be learned in all this from Hollywood.

The 1994 movie Shawshank Redemption is the fictional story of Andy Dufresne, a prisoner at the infamous Shawshank Penitentiary. One of Dufresne’s fellow inmates, Brooks Hatlen, has spent nearly his entire life in Shawshank, and has settled in to the routine and become the prison’s bookkeeper. After a lifetime in prison, Hatlen is finally freed as an old man. Once on the outside, Hatlen finds life beyond bars too complicated and confusing, too new, too risky. He cannot cope with this newfound freedom after a life of bondage and, tragically, he commits suicide.

Brooks Hatlen forgot how to be free. He became accustomed to bondage and let the yearning for freedom die within him over his long stay in the penitentiary.

Andy Dufresne, on the other hand, never let his freedom die. While locked in Shawshank, despite oppressive and often gruesome circumstances, Dufresne’s spirit was unshakable. He constantly cultivated the seeds of freedom in the least free setting imaginable. When Dufresne escaped, unlike Hatlen, he embraced life in the free air and pursued his dreams.

The difference between these two men had nothing to do with their physical circumstances; both were in prison. Yet Andy Dufresne, even while imprisoned, was still free. No bars or guards or hardships could take away his freedom. Hatlen had lost his freedom, and even in the absence of physical oppression, he was still a prisoner. An individual who wants to be free can be, no matter what the world brings. An individual who has let the spirit of freedom die will never be free, no matter what the world brings.

The idea that freedom is simply a state of mind may sound trifling, especially when considering some of the unimaginable horrors faced by unfree peoples across the globe. But even political freedom cannot be had without a people who keep the spirit of freedom alive within themselves; and if they do, political freedom is often not far behind.

Lawrence Reed, president of the Foundation for Economic Education, tells an inspiring story of an underground band of freedom fighters in formerly communist Poland. Their spirit of freedom was kept alive despite a tyrannical Communist regime. Indeed, they not only held onto their belief in freedom, but they spread it, often at great risk to their lives. When the Communist authorities finally announced that they were relinquishing their power the reason they gave was that the Polish people had become “ungovernable.” No regulations, no prisons, no secret police, no propaganda, no physical or political suppression could take away the people’s freedom. They were free, whether the government liked it or not.

Keep this in mind as America’s government changes with each election. Remember this when you see government expanding its reach into your life. Rather than looking to political leaders to protect or expand our freedom we should cultivate the seeds of freedom in our own spirits, and inspire others to do the same. Nothing government can do can take away our freedom; and if we are a people who are truly free, the government will have to follow.

By Don Boudreaux from Cafehayek :

Today is Constitution Day in the United States. On this date in 1787, 39 delegates to the constitutional convention in Philadelphia signed the document that was soon to be ratified by the states as the U.S. Constitution. (It replaced, of course, the Articles of Confederation.)

It’s impossible, I suspect, to find anyone who regards the Constitution as perfect, either in what it says and doesn’t say, or in the ways it’s been interpreted and applied through the years. But this much I am confident of: the 1787 Constitution succeeded in the framers’ goal of creating a huge free-trade zone. For all of the courts’ (and the Court’s) questionable interpretations of this document, and for all of its abuse at the hands of Congresses and Presidents, efforts by state and local governments to protect producers from competition outside of their jurisdictions have largely failed. Sure there are exceptions. But the fact that Floridians can buy oranges from California, Californians can buy wine from Washington state, residents of Washington state can buy apples from North Carolina, North Carolinians can buy seafood from Louisiana, and on and on, is a happy testament to the success of the Constitution’s commerce clause in creating a huge duty-free (and now transcontinental) market that encouraged the division of labor to deepen and, hence, promoted incredible, widespread prosperity.

In a recent post from the Shotgun Blog, I question the government’s role in reducing/controlling risk:

“In his book, The Armchair Economist, Steven Landsburg describes a study on the results of seatbelt laws – another risk reducing mandate. What did he find? The more people wore their seatbelts the more car accidents occurred, resulting in an increase in deaths and injuries.

Why? Individuals increased the risk level of their driving to make up for the risk eliminated by wearing a belt. The number of car crashes increased as people drove more recklessly, but the crashes resulted in fewer deaths and injuries because of the belts. So it canceled out, right? Wrong. Guess who doesn’t benefit from a seatbelt in a crash? Pedestrians. Deaths and injuries from accidents involving pedestrians increased, bringing the total number of deaths and injuries up above what it was before the seatbelt law. An outcome lawmakers didn’t predict.

You might find this hard to believe – would people actually drive more recklessly to make up for the risk that was reduced when they buckled up? Humans make detailed risk calculations like this every day. Each of us has a level of risk we are willing to tolerate in each circumstance, no more and no less. You are willing to increase your chance of death by getting in a car just to pick up a candy bar at the gas station. You may even do so if the road is wet. But if it’s icy, it may no longer be a risk you are willing to take. If roads are dry, however, you may increase your risk by driving faster – if doing 55 on a wet road was okay, on a dry road it may fall below your risk threshold.

Landsburg also discussed studies where individuals were given scalding hot coffee in a paper cup. They dropped it immediately so as not to get burned. But given coffee in a ceramic mug they took the burn while they set it down gently. The brain calculated what a burned hand was worth instantly – more than a paper cup, but less than a ceramic mug. We can calculate risk at amazing levels of speed and detail and we make decisions that keep us within our preferred level in each situation.

Human behavior cannot be willed-away at the whim of the legislature. If you pass this law those drivers who would’ve talked on their cell-phones will engage in some other risky behavior to compensate for it and return to their preferred level of risk.

That is the result of human choice and freedom. Risk is what makes decision-making possible. Risk also brings reward. Risk is an integral part of a free-society; it makes life worth living. A world without risk would be little more than a sterile experiment in a padded cell.”