they need to get some mises folks to help them out with this.
they need to get some mises folks to help them out with this.
“The only conditions were that each candidate had to be over 18 years of age and have at least 30 people nominate them, he explained, adding that people with affiliations to political parties were not in the running.” ~Sounds possible! Doesn’t even stipulate that the person needs to be from Iceland.
“Among the many suggestions that have been put forward ahead of Saturday’s vote is the separation of Church and state and the placing of all natural resources under public ownership, as well as a clear separation between the legislative and executive branch.” ~Don’t think that is going to work out too well if that becomes the new rule of law.
“Parliament is not legally bound by this, but could be morally bound,” he said, adding however that if the assembly is unable to agree on a clear proposal, the house “will basically do whatever it wants.” ~ I think this says it all. What’s the point of trying to re-write a constitution if there’s a chance the government will just ignore the whole thing?
If this whole process is fueled by the “public anger towards the political elite over the collapse of the central banks,” I’d be tempted to bet the whole effort will fail. It’s funny, and quite tragic, that when the masses toss out the political elite, the replacements generally just become a new manifestation of the elite that were thrown out in the first place. History has a funny way of repeating itself. Personally, I think the efforts to make a new constitution are misguided anyways. It’s not a piece of paper that keeps government in check - it’s the people themselves.
I wonder who decided who would be allowed to be nominated in the first place?
So, a few people get to meet and with the signature on a piece of paper, will give themselves the authority to steal from others.
“they need to get some mises folks to help them out with this.”
All they need is Hoppe.
"In conjunction with the privatization of all assets according to the principles outlined, the government should adopt a private property constitution and declare it to be the immutable basic law of the entire country. This constitution should be extremely brief and lay down the following principles in terms as unambiguous as possible:
Every person, apart from being the sole owner of his physical body, has the right to employ his private property in anyway he sees fit so long as in doing so he does not uninvitedly change the physical integrity of another person’s body or property. All interpersonal exchanges and all exchanges of property titles between property owners are to be voluntary (contractual). These rights of a person are absolute. Any person’s infringement on them is subject to lawful persecution by the victim of this infringement or his agent, and is actionable in accordance with the principles of proportionality of punishment and of strict liability.19
As implied by this constitution, then, all existing wage and price controls, all property regulations and licensing requirements, and all import and export restrictions should be immediately abolished and complete freedom of contract, occupation, trade and migration introduced. Subsequently, the government, now propertyless, should declare its own continued existence as unconstitutional-in so far as it depends on noncontractual property acquisitions, that is, taxation-and abdicate." ~ Democracy: God that Failed, Hoppe - p215
Say, hypothetically, Iceland adopted a private property constitution as such - I can see how that would work domestically. Concerning international affairs, however, how would you work around the absence of a contemporary government? Iceland (would “Iceland” as an entity even exist?) - its people, its businesses, and its industries would have to work in a world where there are national governments. I could see things getting a bit complicated if foreign governments became selective in their Icelandic trading partners. Furthermore, how would people travel? Is it practical to have competing businesses issuing visas and passports - would foreign governments even recognize them? In general, do you think such a state would fly in the modern day international scene?
I admit it would be a fascinating experiment - Iceland exhibits all of the desirable traits: geographically isolated, relatively small population, modern economy, educated populace.
“Concerning international affairs, however, how would you work around the absence of a contemporary government?”
How would the market? There’d be many ways. Insurance agencies step forward, PDA’s, DRO’s etc. Those who are fufilling the demand for such services.
“Iceland (would “Iceland” as an entity even exist?) - its people, its businesses, and its industries would have to work in a world where there are national governments.”
Iceland as a nation, sure. Just not a nation-state.
if you guys can get a non intrusive constitution going in Iceland, I want to move there and take up residence.