A GREAT speech given April 8 at Tahrir Square by Dr. Nouh El Harmouzi, Director of Minbaralhurriyya.org.

Rough translation: “My name is Nouh El Harmouzi from Moroccco, and I come to you with a message of respect, a message of dignity, a message of love, a letter of encouragement. I want to tell you that Morocco and the Maghreb and many countries look to your experience as an example, and we look to your revolution as a symbol to all the Arab world. I want to tell you that we hope and we want to see a strong Egypt, strong through a CIVIL state [e.g., not military and not religious] — an Egypt of FREEDOM. Thank you Egyptians for this valuable lesson for the Arabic world. I have one extremely important message to tell you. From the Moroccan people who love you and who want to follow your example: No negotiation for your freedom anymore! Pay attention to keep your freedom! Once again, I encourage you to create a CIVIL state [not military and not religious] and don’t let the politicians steal your freedom! The free Egyptian people can create miracles and can build a developed society. Viva Egypt! Viva the youth who made the revolution! Viva freedom!”

I’m referring to the shocking display (ABC News clip here) of the so-called “Fourth Amendment” to the so-called “Constitution of the United States of America” being written by a man on what he evidently considers his “own chest.”* How sick can you get? Next it’ll be the so-called “First Amendment” to defend his filthy “right” to express his ideas. Not in this country!

*Scholar’s note: On the relationship between self-proprietorship and freedom of conscience, see the discussion of Overton and other Levellers, as well as of John Locke and James Madison, in George H. Smith, “Philosophies of Toleration,” in George H. Smith (“Philosophies of Toleration,” in George H. Smith, Atheism, Ayn Rand, and Other Heresies [Buffalo: Prometheus Books, 1991]). Such “self-propriety” serves as the philosophical justification for the resister’s strategy of “going limp” when arrested by state agents, as Overton argued in refusing to walk to prison when ordered to do so: “My Leggs were borne as free as the rest of my Body, and therefore I scorne that Leggs, or Armes, or hands of mine should do them any villeine-Service, for as I am a Freeman by birth, so I am resolved to live and dye, both in heart word and deed, in substance and in shew.” Overton was quite cruelly dragged by the hair from prison as a consequence. His remarks on this experience remind us of the clear relationship of self-propriety and moral agency: “But in case you object, that I knew well enough, that if I would not go, they would carrie me, therefore it had been better for me to have gone, then to have exposed my selfe to their cruelty, I answer, 1. If I had known they would have hanged me, must I therefore have hanged my selfe? 2. A good conscience had rather run the hazard of cruelty then to abate an hairesbreadth of contestation and opposition against illegality, injustice, and tyranny. 3. If they had had any legall jurisdiction over my leggs, then at their Commands my leggs were bound to obey: And then, (in that case) I confesse it had been better to obey, then to have exposed my person to the cruelty of threatening mercilesse Gaolers: But being free from their Jurisdiction from the Crowne of my head to the Soale of my foote, I know no reason, why I should foote it for them, or in any the least dance any attendance to their Arbitrary Warrants; their Lordships may put up their pipes, except they will play to the good old tune of the Law of the Land, otherwise their Orders and Warrants are never like to have the service of my leggs or feet, for they were never bred to tread in their Arbitrary Steps, but I shall leave their Orders and their execution to themselves. And therefore, Sir, concerning that action of mine, I shall continue in the said esteeme thereof, till my defense be made voide, and it be legally proved, that by the Law of the Land, I was bound to set one legge before another in attendance to that Order.” [Overton, Richard "The Commoner's Complaint," in Overton, Richard, “The Commoner’s Complaint,” Tracts on Liberty in the Puritan Revolution, 1638-1647, Vol. III, W. Haller, ed. (New York: Columbia University Press, 1943), pp. 381-382. James Madison (“Property,” National Gazette, March 27, 1792, The Papers of James Madison, R. A. Rutland and others, eds. [Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia, 1983]) expressed the basis of property in conscience when he wrote, of every individual, that “He has a property of peculiar value in his religious opinions and the free communication of them.” (p. 266)

The referendum is about to begin in Kyrgyzstan, to choose a new constitution which, despite its flaws, will put greater limits on presidential power and, it is hoped, avoid authoritarianism and promote civil peace. Young people around the country, organized by the Central Asian Free Market Institute and similar civil society groups, are working to promote peace and suppress hatred, revenge, and violence. The shirts (see below) say on the front “I Want Peace in Kyrgyzstan” in Uzbek, Kyrgyz, and Russian, and on the back, “One Homeland! One People! One Future!,” also in Uzbek, Kyrgyz, and Russian.

The libertarians in Central Asia are planning to open an office in Osh, as well, to promote peace, liberty, and limited government in the area that has seen so much deliberately provoked violence by people who prefer force and power to persuasion and freedom. It’s not too late to make a modest donation to make that possible. (Ten dollars actually buys something there, and no donation is too small.) Click here for the information. We’ve already raised a few thousand dollars, enough to pay to open the office and equip it, just from Facebook and a few notes, mostly in small donations. Every penny helps!

Peace Activists at the Office of the Central Asian Free Market Institute

Some Faces of Friendship

Getting Ready to Distribute Peace Shirts to Kyrgyz Young People

The Economist: “What happens when you display “Forbidden art”

From Prof. Andrei Zorin of Oxford University (and a contributor to InLiberty.ru and speaker at InLiberty.ru events):

There can be no doubt that a guilty verdict will dramatically change the political climate in Russia and deal a powerful, if not a mortal, blow to the much-hyped modernisation plans of President Dmitry Medvedev. Whether economic and technological modernisation can succeed without political reforms is the subject of intense discussions in Russia. But no one can hope to modernise society without freedom of conscience and the freedom of thought.

Russia’s image abroad, which had just started to improve, will be ruined for at least another decade. The damage to the country’s reputation may prove even longer-lasting than in the Khodorkovsky case. Businessmen are pragmatic people and can sometimes be prepared to trade one of their own to save their investments. Artists and intellectuals are less forgiving.

The story of an art curator and human-rights activist jailed for arranging an exhibition will haunt Russia and all its projects of cultural integration with the West. In such an environment who needs grandiose events like the current “Russian year” in France?

A New York Times discussion, including Cato’s outstanding scholar Jim Harper: “Should Government Take On Facebook?”

I am reminded of the posters I saw in Beijing last year (just up for a short time before they would swiftly be taken down by police): “I want my Facebook!” The state should keep its damn hands off.

Daily Telegraph: “Nick Clegg: tell us the laws that you want scrapped”

The public will be asked what laws they want ripped up, in far-reaching reforms designed to put back “faith in politics”, the Deputy Prime Minister will say.

The reordering of power will sweep away Labour legislation and new criminal offences deemed to have eroded personal freedom.

It will involve the end of the controversial ID cards scheme, the scrapping of universal DNA databases – in which the records of thousands of innocent people have been stored – and restrictions placed on internet records. The use of CCTV cameras will also be reviewed.

Dubbed the “Great Reform Act”, the measures will close down the ContactPoint children’s database. Set up by Labour last year, it includes detailed information on all 11 million youngsters under 18.

In addition, schools will not be able to take a child’s fingerprint without parental permission.

In an attempt to protect freedom of speech, ministers will review libel laws, while limits on peaceful protest will be removed.

HT: Jim Peron

I just found (thanks to snooping around some emails) the text of the Julian L. Simon Memoral Lecture I gave in 2009 in New Delhi on “Democracy and Limited Government: The Unbreakable Partnership.” For those who are interested, some years earlier I wrote essays on “Challenges of Democratization,” “The Role of Institutions and Law in Economic Development,” and other essays on the central role of institutions in the development and enjoyment of liberty that are included in Realizing Freedom: Libertarian Theory, History, and Practice.

“Libertarian” Playboy Mag Hates Choice, Loves Authentic Communism by Michael C. Moynihan includes, as a bonus, Moynihan’s interview with Gorki Aguila of the Cuban band Porno Para Ricardo.

Nick Gillespie vs. Lawrence Lessig on Bill Moyers Journal

Two smart people debate a decision. If you’re confused about what the decision entails, this will help you to understand.

The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education and the Students for Liberty have filed a joint amicus brief for freedom of association in the case of Christian Legal Society v. Martinez. Both groups deserve support from believers (whether “believers” or not) in the right to freedom of association.

The issue has some complications, but I think that the FIRE and SFL brief makes the case well against attempting to dictate the views of groups that receive official recognition at state universities.

“Free Speech for All,” by John Samples and Ilya Shapiro

The New York Times features my friend Hannes Gissurarson of the University of Iceland, who suffered from Britain’s outrageous libel laws, in today’s story: “Britain, Long a Libel Mecca, Reviews Laws“