Ten Points Gareth Morgan

Damien Grant's picture
Submitted by Damien Grant on Thu, 2012-03-29 00:22

Now I've taken a few digs at Gareth Morgan but this idea is brilliant and should tickle the even the coldest libertarian’s heart.


I like it because it is voluntary, it is a private sector driven, (albeit with DOC as the actual contractor) and because I like the idea of native birds (if not the actual birds themselves) and am indifferent to rodents, espicially when they are not where they are meant to be.

This is an excellent initiative and it captured a small slice of my not very hard won money.


reed's picture

I can't find Gareth Morgan's organisation's annual report - Does his Morgan Foundation receive any government funding?

Everything I've seen of Gareth Morgan indicates he likes big government and he'd like to be its business partner. A one man NGO.

This charitable activity is in partnership with the NZ government and all of his overseas charitable activities appear to be in partnership with the United Nations.

The government underfunds popular projects because people will give voluntarily to those projects. *** STARSHIP HOSPITAL *** Every dollar you give voluntarily for popular government projects frees up a dollar for unpopular government projects.

On the mice and men

Leonid's picture

Yes, it applies to mosquitoes and to smallpox. In the man-made world we eliminate both because they are danger to us. But in the natural eco-systems mosquitoes play important role-they are food to fish and frogs. Smallpox in particular is a virus whose only natural host is a man. In the natural circumstances man and smallpox co-exist in balance-smallpox kills about 30% of infected hosts and the rest become carriers-that is, develop natural immunity and coexist with virus. Eradication of the virus also eradicated the natural immunity and today, when immunization against smallpox is no longer exists, in the case of accidental or intentional exposure to the virus the death rate will be 100%. That doesn't mean that eradication of smallpox is a bad thing, but one should remember that this is an artificial , not natural situation. All attempts to regulate the self-regulated eco-system turns it into artificial, domesticated structure. All attempts to regulate the self-regulated market system turns it into domesticated maidservant of the government. The mice on the islands are no danger to any man and are part of its natural environment. So if you want to spend time and money for the obviously useless exercise of domestication the whole island's eco-system-go ahead, on your own expense. But don't present this as a case of preservation of Nature. It isn't. If you want to domesticate free markets-don't call it capitalism. Capitalism is a natural phenomenon , it pertains to man's natural properties-volition and mind. By regulating capitalism one attempts to domesticate man. But men are not mice, nor they are mosquitoes or smallpox. The response to any such attempt should be-leave us alone.

Sorry, I do not know how you

Richard Wiig's picture

Sorry, I do not know how you get there from what Leonid wrote.

You suggested that Leonid thinks that libertarian principles apply to the eco-system. That Leonid would think that is preposterous. He's a libertarian, not an environmentalist who actually does apply rights to rocks and trees and bugs. English is Leonids second language, so he doesn't always say things the way you might expect him to. What Leonid means is, it's preposterous to maintain a state of untouched nature - of course, the only way to do that is to regulate people.

As for the other post, I really have no idea what you are going on about. I have no idea how keeping an unpopulated island rodent free violates anyone's rights.

I haven't said that it does. I pointed out to you that I was talking about the philosophy that underpins it. Mr Morgan spending his own money to eradicate mice violates no ones rights. The philsophy that he's acting on ultimately will. Can you not see the difference?

And no one hear engages in a discussion. You all just shout slogans. It is disappointing. I expected more.

This isn't a discussion because I used the word Nanny? From where I sit I think I'm having a discussion, not blindly shouting slogans.


Damien Grant's picture

Richard: "Only a fraction of thought and you'd have realised that Leonid means the regulation of people."

Sorry, I do not know how you get there from what Leonid wrote.

As for the other post, I really have no idea what you are going on about. I have no idea how keeping an unpopulated island rodent free violates anyone's rights.

Your rights must be very sensitive to be damaged from such a distance.

And no one hear engages in a discussion. You all just shout slogans. It is disappointing. I expected more.

Some pretty fucking effective

Richard Wiig's picture

Some pretty fucking effective regulating of the eco-system there.

Everything you mentioned is about the defence of property and lives, of peoples businesses and health. The question is whether any of it is appropriate action for Nanny, or should it be up to those concerned. Removing mice from some fucking island in the middle of nowhere isn't in the defence of individual rights and property. It's about returning nature to an untouched state, because some perverse philosophy teaches people that it has intrinsic value, and then violating peoples rights in order to maintain it. The opposite of a free-market.

You lot really do talk

Richard Wiig's picture

You lot really do talk nonsense.

Only a fraction of thought and you'd have realised that Leonid means the regulation of people.

you need a larger shovel

Damien Grant's picture

Leonid: "Animals and plants of this world are products of not natural but artificial selection-they simply don't exist in the natural eco-systems."

Does this apply to mosquitoes?

Anyway, my slam dunk was so good I am going to repeat it:

Leonid: "to regulate eco-system is like to regulate the free market-impossible in theory and practice"

Damien: "Smallpox"

And the award goes to...

Leonid's picture

I heave no chance to win the stupid contest against a man who compares natural eco-system with the fighting of animal and human diseases. It's like to apply the principles of modern architecture to the living in caves. Humans ,domesticated animals and plants are living in the artificial, man-made world. Biologically, this world is not regulated but created. Animals and plants of this world are products of not natural but artificial selection-they simply don't exist in the natural eco-systems. They are not autonomic, nor they self-regulating. Without human intervention they will perish. Therefore the principles of the natural eco-system are not applicable to them.

regulating of the eco-system

Damien Grant's picture

Leonid wins: in the Stupidest Comment Of The Month contest: "to regulate eco-system is like to regulate the free market-impossible in theory and practice"

You lot really do talk nonsense. Thinking libertarian principles applies to the natural world makes as much sense as imposing Christian morality on cats.

New Zealand works hard and effectively at controlling TB in cows, killing the painted apple moth and preventing Foot and Mouth.

You will also note humans are pretty good at stopping shit like bird flu when we put our minds to it. Bird flu in humans, like foot and mouth disease, and mice in south sea islands, are all natural things but in the wrong place as far as people concerned.

You may have heard of smallpox? Some pretty fucking effective regulating of the eco-system there.

Yes, ad hoc

Leonid's picture

Yes, ad hoc. State qua state shouldn't be financed in any way, including borrowing of money. Only specific government projects should be voluntary financed.

Don't you mean...

Marcus's picture

...ad hoc?

Another rule needed would be that the state is not allowed to borrow money. Is that possible?

Cats and mice

Leonid's picture

Yes, to regulate eco-system is like to regulate the free market-impossible in theory and practice. It could only be detrimental as an intervention in any self-regulating autonomic system. I also would say that funding of state, even a voluntary funding is a typical statist concept and shouldn't be adopted by Libertarians or Objectivists. Such a funding makes a government totally unaccountable-they can spend money in any way they please. People should only support government projects on ad hock principle. That will severely curb the government's penchant to overspend money on the projects in which most of the people have no slightest interest. People should vote with their wallets on each and every government project. That may even send the fat government cats to catch mice in the Antipodes Islands.

I hold nothing against Mr

Richard Wiig's picture

I hold nothing against Mr Morgan for removing mice with his own money.

Although, what he's doing is a product of the eco-fascist movement. Why isn't he out digging holes to extract coal, or something constructive like that? Because he has imbibed in the idea that purity is superior. Let's suppose he's spent millions to eradicate mice and it's achieved. What then? A massive regulatory and policing regime to ensure that the purity is maintained? All on taxpayers money? If he owns the island he's making pure, and he pays for it all, then fine. I don't care. But if he's setting up more bureacracy and bullshit with the tab to be picked up by the taxpayer, then he can go and get stuffed. And my attitude, btw, doesn't mean that I won't pay my own way in life when it comes to necessary government functions, much as you believe it does.

P.S. You are 100% wrong in thinking it's impossible to have a voluntarily funded libertarian state. It's actually the opposite. If one is ever established, it's impossible for it not to be. Why? Because it can only be founded and sustained through selfishness.


Leonid's picture

I cannot see where is a problem. No eco-structure is static. There are always some intruders who cause dynamic change. If the lack of predators is a problem, then the only thing you have to do is to introduce to the island few cats and watch how Nature is balancing itself. I'm sure that there are a plenty of street cats who can benefit from this program and the money could be voluntary contributed to the much worthy project.

No shadows at midday here. In

Richard Wiig's picture

No shadows at midday here. In my first post I was referring to his organization, not the singular project of removing mice. A big part of it is lobbying for government controls, that is to say, more socialism. In my second post I was referring to the Eco-fascist philosophy, which does indeed seek Ecological purity. It wants to remove man from the picture. I hold nothing against Mr Morgan for removing mice with his own money.

Anyway, here's some ecofascists:

George Reisman states that the next mass murdering tyrant is likely to rise out of the ecology movement. Here's his critique of environmentalism.



Damien Grant's picture

You are seeing shadows at midday.

I am accepting Morgan totally at face value, that he is putting his money where his ecological mouth is and calling for others to contribute. Isn’t that your philosophy?

Denouncing his desire to remove an introduced pest from an isolated island as a form of twisted nazi purity demonstrates that you have become so ingrained in your own delusional cul-de-sac that you can no longer see what is in front of you.

You are no different from Penny Bright who imagines right-wing cabals everywhere secretly plotting to enslave workers, reintroduce public flogging and boil kittens alive for the pleasure of satanic capitalists who sit on thrones made from the bones of children.

If you believe in a libertarian state, well, here it is in action. Your distrust, superior distain for the efforts of others, refusal to co-operate and over-riding self-interest underpins my belief that a state funded by voluntary contributions will not be able to cover the cost of a policeman’s truncheon much less protect the property rights of the weak and vulnerable.

If there was a libertarian state you would find some sophistry to grant yourself an exemption for helping to pay for it, but the people who you hold in contempt, like Morgan, would pay his share and then some I suspect.

Ecological purity is the name

Richard Wiig's picture

Ecological purity is the name of the game, Leonid. Reminiscent of the nazis racial purity.


Damien Grant's picture

The mice are an introduced species, they have no predators, they are like stoats on the mainland. They kill native birds and have no predators. Read the website!

Morgan is offering to pay for half the cost of the eradication program, so if you actually believe that a state can be funded by voluntary contributions (I do not, as it happens) then here is a real life example where half the cost is being funded by Morgan.

Not a real test as we are living in a compulsory taxation world, but it is interesting none the less. It is a good cause, even in a libertarian world there are going to be ecological concerns, Morgan is putting up half the money, and yet only 221k has been raised.

If voluntary contributions cannot kill a mice population on an isolated island there seems frick all chance it is going to defeat a foot and mouth outbreak.

Did anybody think about what

Leonid's picture

Did anybody think about what would happen to the ecological equilibrium after elimination of all mice? What would be the effect of growth of insect's population and plants which mice eat? What would happen to the predators who eat mice? In Nature there is no such a thing as a pest. If mice exist on The Antipodes Islands, they occupy certain ecological niche and perform vital function in the Islands' ecology. Besides, why the elimination of mice should melt "the coldest libertarian’s heart."? Are all mice statists?


Damien Grant's picture

A desire to kill mice is simply a desire to kill mice and not a cunning socialist plan.

I'm refering to the

Richard Wiig's picture

I'm refering to the organisation as a whole.


Damien Grant's picture

We are talking about unpopulated mice infested islands in the southern ocean.

As far as socialist conspiracies go I do not think there is much challenge to our liberty.

It seems like a vehicle for

Richard Wiig's picture

It seems like a vehicle for the advancement of socialist control of the environment to me. It's obviously quite effective.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.