By E.D. Kain

Nearly every elected official in Congress voted for the National Defense Authorization Act, a bill placing domestic terrorism investigations into the hands of the US Military. We need to elect more politicians willing to vote ‘Nay.’

Over on Google Plus, in a response to this very excellent post by Alex Tabbarok, Jim Henley writes:

The IP law trend represents a move toward a new feudalism of the mind, where incumbents collect rents on ideas rather than parcels of ground. It’s part of the increasing effort, along with the official coddling of the FIRE sector and selective “austerity” budgeting, to lock in the gains of the Haves.

This is a smart observation. Look at the sectors of the economy that have long been subject to protectionism, price obfuscation, and so forth: healthcare, finance, defense, real-estate. With IP law and the surge in patent suits and patent-trolling we’re doing to the software and tech industry what we’ve already seen happen with the FIRE economy. It’s a troubling trend that’s bad for start-ups, for consumers, and for the economy at large.

The openness of the internet is threatened by bills like SOPA in the House and PIPA in the Senate. The long arm of the law is bending toward clamping down on sharing, collaboration, and innovation whether through overt censorship measures like those contained in these bills, or through the courts in the ever-growing and increasingly burgeoning patent system.

I like Henley’s framing of the issue. This is an attempt by the Haves to protect their interests against disruptive forces. Now, as a free market guy I see the biggest threat to entrenched interests and the Haves of this world as actually free markets. Without the protections offered through the legal system the status quo would actually have to compete to avoid failure. Through patent law – on everything from software to seeds – and other forms of protectionism, censorship, bailouts and subsidies the state bulwarks big corporations against market forces, consumer flight, and up-start start-ups.

Kevin Carson says it well:

Remember the Pinkertons, uniformed private thugs the bosses used to hire to bust union organizers’ heads? Now Monstanto hires them to snoop around private farms, testing farmers’ crops to see if they contain any genetic material from engineered seeds under patent. The Runyons, an Indiana farm family, were invaded in 2008 by Monsanto’s hired goons in response to an “anonymous tip” that their farm hosted Roundup-ready soybeans. Sounds almost like — ahem — the Drug War, doesn’t it?

Never mind that the Runyons never planted Monsanto’s seed. Never mind that their crops were contaminated — very much against their will — by GMO pollen blowing over from a neighbor’s farm. You might think it was the Runyons who had a cause of action for the contamination of their crops with frankenfood DNA. But not in our so-called “free market system.” In this thing the neoliberals call a “free market,” being contaminated by Monsanto DNA — even against your will — is prima facie evidence of “piracy.” You’re guilty until proven innocent.

Orwell once observed that after 1914, the states of the 20th century were resurrecting forms of torture and atrocity largely unseen since the Inquisition. Likewise, under “our free market system,” we’re seeing a resurgence of — believe it or not — debtors’ prison. In the “old days” — as recently as the 1990s — creditors would attempt to collect debts in-house, then write them off. Now collection agencies buy up debt for pennies on the dollar. After serving process at an address where you lived three moves ago, they get you declared in contempt in absentiaand jailed. Or you might just find your bank account cleaned out by your bank in collusion with the creditors, without warning.

And then there are “food libel laws” and FDA restrictions on commercial speech. If you label your milk rBGH-free, you can expect to be muscled by Monsanto’s lawyers. The very act of informing your customers your milk lacks rBGH constitutes disparagement of the frankenmilk from those factory dairies, you see. If you advertise that you inspect your meat for Mad Cow Disease more frequently than the USDA requires, you’re disparaging your competitors by implying that simply meeting the regulatory standard — a standard based on SOUND SCIENCE! — is somehow inadequate. And someone’s feelings might get hurt.

Interestingly, the few attempts by government to actually serve the interests of consumers are foiled at every turn. The Consumer Protection Bureau has been all but strangled in its crib. Whether or not it will actually do what its creators envisioned or not is beside the point. If we can’t even get a director for the Bureau nominated, how can we find out one way or another if it will work or not?

Somehow bills like SOPA which hurt individuals and hedge in on free speech and civil liberties speed through congress and would speed all the way to the finish line but for the efforts of a few sensible Senators like Ron Wyden, while it’s essentially impossible to pass a bill that actually has a chance at helping individuals.

This is because the state, at least in its current iteration, is largely geared toward protecting the powerful against disruptive forces. Don’t get me wrong, I’m against the ‘selective austerity’ Jim mentions above. Cutting benefits for the poor and firing middle class public sector workers while maintaining huge tax breaks for the wealthy and leaving the vast systems of corporate subsidies and the near-trillion dollar a year defense budget intact is, as Jim argues, just another way to protect the Haves against the Have-Nots.

It’s all part and parcel of the same system, whether we’re talking about food libel laws, patent-trolling, internet censorship, indefinite detention in the War on Terror, or no-knock SWAT raids, the pepper-spraying of peaceful protesters- the law is increasingly tilted against the individual and against freedom.

Here’s my idea. Libertarians should give up on working with Republicans or trying to maintain their own party. Progressives should quit the Democrats. Let’s not worry about party affiliation or about parties at all – certainly let’s not worry about starting futile third parties.

Let’s focus on electing civil libertarians at the state, local, and federal level. I would vote for Ron Wyden or Rand Paul in a heartbeat over 99% of the politicians out there because these are men who actually care about liberty – and not just soundbite liberty. Not the sort of liberty that you hear about while chanting “USA! USA!” or during the run-up to the Iraq War or Libya.

We need elected officials who care about simple, mundane liberties. You know, like the right to a trial, a lawyer, to be considered innocent until proven guilty whether or not you’re a US citizen. The right to free speech and dissent and peaceful gathering. You know, the things that form the bedrock of this nation that we are so quick these days to cast on the bonfire of national security.

We need to elect more men and women willing to stand up against bills that strip away our basic rights. We have more to fear from these laws than we do from terrorism or internet piracy. We need leaders on the left and the right who reflect American values, and not American fears.

Source: http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2011/12/10/sopa-the-ndaa-and-patent-trolling-why-americans-need-a-civil-liberties-caucus/