Regarding Inclusive Institutions

[human_murda]

As a continuation of this comment and response to the following statement:

On 12/13/2024 at 6:26 PM, Harrison Danneskjold said:

Still, there are parts of the world which still haven’t really industrialized.  There may be the odd car here or there, certainly, but plenty of people in our interconnected world (who are living in the modern era) do not benefit from any of the technological advances we’ve made in the past few centuries.

I benefited from anti-Western movements in Kerala. The reason you have property rights (enforced by your government) is different from the reason I have property rights. You may have property rights as a result of renaissance but I have property rights as a result of anti-Western, anti-caste, anti-imperialist and anti-colonial political movements in Kerala. Anti-Western movements here aren’t against European renaissance or technology. Renaissance helped establish inclusive institutions in Europe and were good for Europe. That is not the issue.

Kerala was one of the most casteist, feudal and poorest states in India during British rule:

 

Upper caste Hindus (Brahmins, Nairs) and upper caste Christians (Nasranis / St Thomas Christians) formed the aristocracy in Kerala (known as Jenmi) while lower caste Hindus (Ezhava, Pulaya, etc) and Muslims (Mappila / Mopla) formed the tenant class during British times. There were many protests in Kerala even before independence against the ruling aristocracy (Jenmis) of Kerala and the British, which later consolidated itself into the communist movement. There was the Vaikom Satyagraha and Temple Entry Proclamation among others. There was a communist, anti-feudal rebellion led by Muslims (Malabar Rebellion, led by people like Variyankunnath Kunjahammad Haji) against Jenmis, which was crushed by the British.

Anti-Western and anti-caste movements in Kerala eventually led to the creation of the most dominant political party in Kerala, the Communist Party of India (Marxist). They created the inclusive institutions in Kerala that led to rapid expansion of prosperity in Kerala in the last 30 years. Land redistribution was passed in 1969 and property rights were established in the 1970s. Kerala went from being one of the poorest states in 1960 to having one of the lowest poverty rates today:

Among states in India, Kerala has the second highest HDI (Human Development Index), fourth lowest infant mortality rate (lower than many US states), is the least corrupt state, the highest gender equality (others in the list aren’t states), highest literacy rate, highest life expectancy, one of the lowest rates of hunger and nutrition deficiencies, the lowest rate of childhood stunting.

Kerala has one of the highest car ownership, the largest houses, the lowest homicide rate (less than half the average of India and more than 6 times lower than the US), the lowest wealth inequality, the highest rural incomes, highest levels of urbanization, has the lowest percentage of the population in the poorest 2 quintiles of India (only 3% of Kerala’s population is among the poorest 40% of Indians).

Kerala has the highest social mobility in India:

Kerala has the highest food safety standards, highest access to improved sanitation (lakshadweep is not a state). Kerala had the third highest GDP per capita growth among large states between 1990 and 2020:

Kerala had the highest GDP per capita growth among large states in another period analyzed by this paper:

Kerala has the highest road density, is one of the densest states in India (3 times denser than India, more than 20 times denser than the US), has one of the highest forest covers for a dense state, is one of the few states in India where beef is legal, has the second lowest population growth, is the most religiously diverse state in India (55% Hindu, 26% Muslim, 18% Christian), had the lowest death rates during Covid (and the only oxygen surplus state during covid), the highest percentage of solved cases of missing people, is the only state in India with a normal sex ratio, has one of the best police and court systems in India, has the second least gender vulnaribility, has the lowest percentage of people living in slums (despite being one of the most urbanized).

The point is that the inclusive institutions built by the communist party has actually worked and this was an explicitly anti-Western, anti-feudal and anti-caste movement. Kerala went from being the second or third poorest state to one of the most prosperous in roughly 30-50 years (but still has many problems). Kerala (the state with 35mil people) has lower poverty rates than even Mumbai or Delhi. This has nothing to do with renaissance or Europe or the West. Kerala is actually one of the first democratically elected communist governments in the world and charted out its own trajectory of creating inclusive institutions.

People in Kerala have high access to credit due to high land ownership, which people use to obtain loans for building houses, businesses and for pursuing education. A lot of Kerala has very large houses from loans accessed by using land redistributed by communists as security. Over the last 30 years, people have been building mansions in cities:

and mansions in towns:

and mansions in villages:

Lots of people In Kerala are experiencing prosperity for the first time. Kerala is still a very poor state with a GDP per capita of $4300 (2024), 20 times lower than the US and still has many problems. Kerala still needs to do a lot to fully industrialize. However, Kerala changed drastically in the last 30-50 years after land redistribution. India was one of the poorest countries in the world in 1960 and Kerala was even poorer than that. However, inclusive institutions (built by anti-Western political movements) have kick-started development in Kerala. It has only been a few decades since Kerala (and people from my caste) even had property rights but it has already changed dramatically.

On the other hand, the most resource rich state in India (Jharkhand) has extremely poor development. They have child labourers, most of their environment has been ravaged by mining and nobody knows where TF their money is going:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UzivaxYf1iM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7D-gyH88JPM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Snjl7ss2OQ4

Jharkhand is a good example of a state with extractive institutions with extremely poor levels of development.

[Harrison_Danneskjold]

1 hour ago, human_murda said:

Anti-Western and anti-caste movements in Kerala eventually led to the creation of the most dominant political party in Kerala, the Communist Party of India (Marxist). They created the inclusive institutions in Kerala that led to rapid expansion of prosperity in Kerala in the last 30 years. Land redistribution was passed in 1969 and property rights were established in the 1970s.

1.  A movement for property rights is not actually an anti-Western movement, in the sense I mean.  Maybe “the englightenment” is a better thing to point to.  As I said in that other thread:

Quote

Have you ever seen a map of the “global North”?  It’s a map of free countries where peoples’ lifestyles reflect the modern era, versus countries where people live like they did a few centuries ago and often starve.

I would basically consider this a map of Western civilization, and there are a few interesting things to note about it.

Firstly, it’s not limited to the actual West (nor the global North); these are just loose ways of referring to those countries which have benefitted from the Enlightenment, and those which have not.  Australia and New Zealand are about as far Southeast as you can get, for example, and yet they’re still part of Western civilization.

Secondly, South Korea is part of the “global North” while North Korea is not - not because any economic or historical forces are preventing the North Koreans from joining the club, but because their government has forbidden it.  Certain people there  do not want  anyone else to be able to live the way the South Koreans do.

Being part of “Western Civilization” does not mean that your country is actually in the West, that your people descend from that area or even that you’re necessarily on very good terms with all of those countries.  It means that you have Enlightenment concepts like “private property” (concepts which do come from Europe, although absolutely anyone can learn about them) and that you use them.

 

2.  Prosperity seems to have followed the institution of private property, which tracks perfectly with what we see in the rest of the world.  With any luck at all maybe India will join the club of Enlightenment countries.

3.  The… _ Marxists _ fought for the institution of private property?

What?  I’ll be frank, I have no idea what the facts of this matter are but - what???

Does Marx not translate well into Hindi or Punjabi or something?

[human_murda]

1 hour ago, Harrison Danneskjold said:

A movement for property rights is not actually an anti-Western movement, in the sense I mean.

Yes it is. A movement aimed at dismantling extractive institutions built by the West (and the caste system) in Kerala is explicitly anti-Western. CPI-M is explicitly anti-Western. Just because it’s good doesn’t mean it’s Western.

1 hour ago, Harrison Danneskjold said:

3.  The… _ Marxists _ fought for the institution of private property?

What?  I’ll be frank, I have no idea what the facts of this matter are but - what???

Does Marx not translate well into Hindi or Punjabi or something?

You should ask the CIA that question.

[Harrison_Danneskjold]

22 minutes ago, human_murda said:

Yes it is. A movement aimed at dismantling extractive institutions built by the West (and the caste system) in Kerala is explicitly anti-Western. CPI-M is explicitly anti-Western. Just because it’s good doesn’t mean it’s Western.

 

Stop.  Go back.  Read.  This is the third time I’ve reiterated the very same point over again and I will not do it again.

 

1 hour ago, Harrison Danneskjold said:

1.  A movement for property rights is not actually an anti-Western movement, in the sense I mean.  Maybe “the englightenment” is a better thing to point to.  As I said in that other thread:

Quote

Have you ever seen a map of the “global North”?  It’s a map of free countries where peoples’ lifestyles reflect the modern era, versus countries where people live like they did a few centuries ago and often starve.

I would basically consider this a map of Western civilization, and there are a few interesting things to note about it.

Firstly, it’s not limited to the actual West (nor the global North); these are just loose ways of referring to those countries which have benefitted from the Enlightenment, and those which have not.  Australia and New Zealand are about as far Southeast as you can get, for example, and yet they’re still part of Western civilization.

Secondly, South Korea is part of the “global North” while North Korea is not - not because any economic or historical forces are preventing the North Koreans from joining the club, but because their government has forbidden it.  Certain people there  do not want  anyone else to be able to live the way the South Koreans do.

Being part of “Western Civilization” does not mean that your country is actually in the West, that your people descend from that area or even that you’re necessarily on very good terms with all of those countries.  It means that you have Enlightenment concepts like “private property” (concepts which do come from Europe, although absolutely anyone can learn about them) and that you use them.

 

[human_murda]

40 minutes ago, Harrison Danneskjold said:

Stop.  Go back.  Read.  This is the third time I’ve reiterated the very same point over again and I will not do it again.

I know what you’re trying to do. You’re trying to claim all good things as Western.

I’m saying that whether or not something is Western is determined by tradition and influence. The Western tradition and influence in Kerala was the creation of extractive institutions. The development of inclusive institutions was anti-Western. It was not part of the Western tradition in Kerala or India. The origin of the communist movement in Kerala is not Western. That fact can be seen in the thousands of cooperatives that exist in Kerala, in the hundreds of trade unions (the largest being CITU), in all the public hospitals and the public schools, among many other things. The cultural origin of the movement is not Western. It was explicitly anti-imperialist. In fact, the West tried to sabotage multiple attempts at dismantling extractive Western institutions globally. Now, that is actually Western.

You saying that land redistribution in Kerala is Western is like me saying that Renaissance in Europe is communism or that Renaissance originates from Kerala.

40 minutes ago, Harrison Danneskjold said:

It means that you have Enlightenment concepts like “private property” (concepts which do come from Europe, although absolutely anyone can learn about them) and that you use them.

Sorry, Europe does not own concepts. If some aliens with no contact with Earth established private property, that wouldn’t be Western. There’s no Western influence or tradition there. You’re basically a White hotep.

[Harrison_Danneskjold]

23 minutes ago, human_murda said:

You’re basically a White hotep.

 

Well, since you already speak the correct language, try reading some Ayn Rand at some point and maybe I’ll make you an honorary Aryan. 

[human_murda]

47 minutes ago, Harrison Danneskjold said:

Well, since you already speak the correct language, try reading some Ayn Rand at some point and maybe I’ll make you an honorary Aryan. 

Did Ayn Rand trademark English now?

Communism in Kerala wasn’t mainly about private property, just non-feudal (not non-governmental) property rights. Kerala has plenty of public property.

The idea/concept of owning property is way older than Renaissance Europe. Just because White people took a shit in Renaissance Europe doesn’t mean that anyone anywhere taking a shit is Enlightenment.

[SpookyKitty]

3 hours ago, human_murda said:

Did Ayn Rand trademark English now?

Communism in Kerala wasn’t mainly about private property, just non-feudal (not non-governmental) property rights. Kerala has plenty of public property.

The idea/concept of owning property is way older than Renaissance Europe. Just because White people took a shit in Renaissance Europe doesn’t mean that anyone anywhere taking a shit is Enlightenment.

It really should come as no surprise whatsoever to anyone who knows anything AT ALL about Marxism to see Marxists supporting private property rights in feudal societies.

You have to remember, you’re arguing with someone who is obviously and painfully uneducated.

 

Quote

You’re basically a White hotep.

 Now that right there is a proper reduction to the essentials.
 

[tadmjones]

Because race is essential and irreducible !

[Doug_Morris]

7 hours ago, Harrison Danneskjold said:

The… _ Marxists _ fought for the institution of private property?

What?  I’ll be frank, I have no idea what the facts of this matter are but - what???

As I understand it, the Marxist idea of progressive improvement is:

1.  Progress from tribalism to feudalism.  (Example: Genghis Khan)

2.  Progress from feudalism to capitalism.

3.  “Progress” from capitalism to socialism.

4.  “Progress” from socialism to communism.

So the Marxists in Kerala have done some of step 2.  If they go too far with step 3, it will be a tragedy for Kerala.

Note also that Marxism has strange definitions for at least some of these terms, but at least it recognizes that property is important in capitalism.

 

[whYNOT]

8 hours ago, Doug Morris said:

As I understand it, the Marxist idea of progressive improvement is:

1.  Progress from tribalism to feudalism.  (Example: Genghis Khan)

2.  Progress from feudalism to capitalism.

3.  “Progress” from capitalism to socialism.

4.  “Progress” from socialism to communism.

So the Marxists in Kerala have done some of step 2.  If they go too far with step 3, it will be a tragedy for Kerala.

Note also that Marxism has strange definitions for at least some of these terms, but at least it recognizes that property is important in capitalism.

 

1 - 4 is generally about right, I think. Reminds somewhat of South Africa’s - “progress”. 

Pseudo-“capitalism” plus faux “property rights”. Pragmatic methods adopted by the Marxian(-Maoist) playbooks to arrive at communist ends.

The glaring absence of under-pinnings - personal independence and individualism. And individual rights. And separation of state/economy.

Let alone, (much despised) rational selfishness. Result: fail.

Blame those colonizers.

[Doug_Morris]

On 12/16/2024 at 7:22 AM, whYNOT said:

Pseudo-“capitalism” plus faux “property rights”. Pragmatic methods adopted by the Marxian(-Maoist) playbooks to arrive at communist ends.

What grounds do you have for saying “pseudo” and “faux”?

On 12/16/2024 at 7:22 AM, whYNOT said:

The glaring absence of under-pinnings - personal independence and individualism. And individual rights. And separation of state/economy.

Let alone, (much despised) rational selfishness. Result: fail.

Doesn’t this apply to the whole world, not just Kerala?

 

[Harrison_Danneskjold]

On 12/15/2024 at 4:31 PM, human_murda said:

The idea/concept of owning property is way older than Renaissance Europe. Just because White people took a shit in Renaissance Europe doesn’t mean that anyone anywhere taking a shit is Enlightenment.

Yes, and the only reason why the flag on the moon is an American one and not Indian is because America stole it from them.  I bet they didn’t even change the design, did they; just pointed at it and said “this means America now”.

[human_murda]

1 hour ago, Harrison Danneskjold said:

Yes, and the only reason why the flag on the moon is an American one and not Indian is because America stole it from them.  I bet they didn’t even change the design, did they; just pointed at it and said “this means America now”.

Of course, the American nationalist feels insecure about the fact that one of the poorest countries is now slighly less poor. Can the American brain comprehend ideas or language (unless they’re trademarked as Western/good or Eastern/evil)?

[whYNOT]

On 12/18/2024 at 2:35 AM, Doug Morris said:

What grounds do you have for saying “pseudo” and “faux”?

Doesn’t this apply to the whole world, not just Kerala?

 

“Capitalist Production” has been so finally, inescapably, proven itself effective, that even/especially enemies and agnostics of “selfish” capitalism realized they need the benefits of it. Or else, the people live in poverty or starve. Then their leaders lose their grasp on power. Then cannot enrich themselves. I do mean the whole world, of which a “Kerala” in microcosm provides an object lesson. The distinguishing criterion is how healthy are individual/property rights in any specific country.

[Harrison_Danneskjold]

On 12/17/2024 at 11:29 PM, human_murda said:

Of course, the American nationalist feels insecure about the fact that one of the poorest countries is now slighly less poor. Can the American brain comprehend ideas or language (unless they’re trademarked as Western/good or Eastern/evil)?

Although we’ve been vociferously disagreeing on basically every point here, I’d like to point out that I have not once questioned your intellectual honesty nor started speculating about the psychological motivations which support your beliefs in place of facts.

 

As a nationalist in the greatest (richest, most powerful, most scientifically advanced - you name it and America is #1 in it)* country in history, the accusation of “insecurity” rings a bit hollow. After all, there is a reason that the flag on the moon is American.

 

*Except for total population, which I believe is India’s primary claim to fame

 

Furthermore, some national sense of “insecurity” would actually be a better explanation for the side of the conversation that refuses to distinguish between ideologies and ethnicities. I have offered at least three (but I actually believe it was four) times to use the term “enlightenment countries” instead of “western countries” to help you make the distinction between skin color and beliefs. You don’t seem to want to make that distinction. In fact, the distinction seems to annoy you.

 

By Shiva, all I know is that the flag on the moon is American.

[human_murda]

On 12/19/2024 at 5:21 PM, Harrison Danneskjold said:

As a nationalist in the greatest (richest, most powerful, most scientifically advanced - you name it and America is #1 in it)* country in history, the accusation of “insecurity” rings a bit hollow. After all, there is a reason that the flag on the moon is American.

Nobody gives a shit whether a flag on the moon is American. What tells you whether an economic or political system works or not is the prosperity of the masses. As for “richest, most powerful”, that also depends on population, which is also a part of America’s claim to fame. “Murica Numba 1” is your substitute for an argument. I could not give less of a shit. Don’t care about India. Let’s say India is 200 out of 200. I don’t know how many variations of “India is the poorest country in the world” I can say before you comprehend that I don’t care about India’s ranking.

On 12/19/2024 at 5:21 PM, Harrison Danneskjold said:

Furthermore, some national sense of “insecurity” would actually be a better explanation for the side of the conversation that refuses to distinguish between ideologies and ethnicities.

Stop projecting. This is probably your 10,000th post about “Murica numba 1, English numba 1, Hollywood numba 1”. These are literally half your posts.

On 12/19/2024 at 5:21 PM, Harrison Danneskjold said:

I have offered at least three (but I actually believe it was four) times to use the term “enlightenment countries” instead of “western countries” to help you make the distinction between skin color and beliefs. You don’t seem to want to make that distinction.

Because “enlightenment” is a historical event in Europe that has jackshit to do with Kerala, either directly or indirectly. Kerala’s recent growth is a result of opposition to Western and Enlightenment countries.

Different people have different histories. The relation between skin color and beliefs is history. You’re trying to claim other people’s history as Europe’s history, by trying to relate everything to enlightenment (using enlightenment instead of western doesn’t change anything, it’s still a specific historical movement that has nothing to do with the Indian independence movement and communism). I’m not saying that the difference between different beliefs is skin color, but history. Secondly, the beliefs aren’t the same (property ownership is an extremely old and general concept. The type of property rights that communists in Kerala fought for (right of people to own their own home and farm) is not the same as the type of “property rights” that capitalists think of (rights of companies as abstract entities to own things)). The “beliefs” and the history aren’t the same but you want to find some way to credit Europeans and enlightenment. Europeans should learn to take credit for what they did between 1757 and 1947 in India. Stop trying to claim that post independent anti-colonial political movements are a European movement (enlightenment). The ideology itself is very different, let alone the history. Claiming that communism in Kerala is a European movement (enlightenment) is the most retarded thing I’ve ever heard. White people need to stick to claiming their own history. There’s no way to describe it other than as White hotepism (and it’s not a new thing either. This is White culture).

 

On 12/15/2024 at 5:22 PM, Harrison Danneskjold said:

On 12/14/2024 at 9:11 PM, human_murda said:

I don’t know why you keep bringing up the caste system and sati to justify colonialism.

They’re some of the Enlightenment values that India got from being colonized.

Stop trying to bring up this retarded argument that the British ended the caste system. The British practiced, formalized and expanded the scope of the caste system. The caste system was abolished by evil leftists in India after independence.

[human_murda]

On 12/15/2024 at 5:22 PM, Harrison Danneskjold said:

Also, I think these “inclusive” and “extractive institutions” are anticoncepts.  They’re very close to something true (that what dictates the success or failure of nations is all about ideas) - close enough, in fact, that one can sort of use them in an approximate way to mean the underlying ideas.

But you’re grouping together freedom and coercion on both sides (inclusive and extractive) of the coin.  “Extractive” institutions will usually be the coercive ones, unless one or two members of an organization are actually producing the most value (in which case the material benefits will seem to only be serving a few) and “inclusive” institutions will usually be the free ones, except when the majority of some country decides to rob some minority.

It’s a very clumsy way of breaking things down.  No precision at all.

The idea of a separation between the economy and the state is a fantasy. All governments require funding and the economic growth of all countries is heavily driven by government spending. This was always the case from the earliest times of the industrial revolution to today. Objectivism promotes the contradiction that is the “separation of the state and the economy” by never talking in any detail about how governments are to be funded or the role that government spending plays in economic growth. According to the founder of the American financial system:

Quote

A national debt, if it is not excessive, will be to us a national blessing; it will be a powerful cement of our union.

The idea was that public spending will increase the cash flow while credit can be issued to the public using government bonds / debt as collateral to boost economic growth. Today, every country on the planet boosts economic growth through deficit spending and public debt. The only limit to public debt is determined by debt sustainability, which is determined by interest rates. The interest rates are determined by the number of investors demanding government bonds from that country, which is determined by the strength or convertibility of the currency of that country (which is the “safety” of investment in government bonds).

The convertibility of a currency is determined by multiple factors. USD is the world’s reserve currency and the most convertible currency in the world, as a result of which people globally are investing in US government bonds, which means that there’s pretty much no limit to US debt. Under the assumption of perpetual economic growth, the debt to GDP ratio can be kept at a specific value based on the interest rates and deficit spending can be done perpetually, with no intention of ever repaying debt (they’re continually refinanced). Countries with low economic growth (like Japan) can do deficit spending, but only at very low interest rates. Countries with oil have their currencies backed by oil, which increases their convertibility, allowing them to do deficit spending. This is how Saudi Arabia became developed. Other countries improve the strength of their currency by exporting manufactured goods and acquiring USD forex reserves. Some countries take loans from international organizations to keep their currencies afloat in order to do more deficit spending.

All of this is done in order to boost economic growth. There is no separation between the state and the economy and there never has been. Countries like Argentina, Sri Lanka and Greece have experienced sovereign debt crisis. This isn’t due to “socialism”. Every country that hasn’t defaulted is also running on debt. The collapse is mainly a result of declining investor confidence and difficulty in refinancing debt at low interest rates. Developing countries in particular experience high interest rates and frequent defaults, but there’s no alternative. Countries have to keep running budget deficits and rake up debt to develop.

China, when it was at the peak of its economic growth took insane levels of debt and invested in infrastructure. They also exported lots of goods to retain investor confidence in their currency, which allowed them to take all that debt with low interest rates and spur economic growth.

This also highlights the importance for countries to have or develop convertible currencies. The US is currently experiencing a bubble in its bond and stock market due to USD being the world’s reserve currency. US can print currency and take on insane levels of debt without collapsing the value of the USD significantly. To reduce the dependency on USD, countries can try to move to a different common currency. EU has already done that. The BRICS currency is something often talked about but is mostly fantasy (and the US would probably sanction multiple countries if this happened, because it would pop the US investment bubble as well as reduce US’s ability to export inflation and debt globally). However, considering the current US investment bubble, an alternate currency is bound to happen sometime in the future. This will let more countries integrate their state and the economy like the US. More spending, more debt, perpetual growth.

Also, considering the role that public spending and deficit spending plays in all modern countries, inclusive institutions are even more important. Without them, most of the government spending and cash flow will go towards big businesses and remain in the hands of a few stakeholders in the economy while the majority of the population will never see the benefits of economic growth. Without inclusive institutions, public spending and economic growth will be confined to the already ultra-wealthy.

Supporters of capitalism might suggest that such economic distortions are caused by the government and can be fixed with austerity, but the fact is that all countries have always grown with heavy government involvement. Countries without lots of public spending and deficit spending and debt will experience low economic growth and lose competitiveness. It is the union of the state and the economy that has been driving economic growth in all countries in the world for the past several centuries and has been on overdrive in the last century with Keynesian economics becoming the dominant mainstream economic framework. The role of institutions, in this framework, should be to ensure that the entire population benefits from all this debt and public spending. Otherwise, GDP growth will remain an abstract concept that doesn’t actually improve the real wages of people and the quality of people’s lives.

The world in the past 2.5 centuries was not really capitalist (in the sense of there being a separation of the economy and the state). Expansion of every single economy in the world has been state-led. Not just economies that get some occasional state intervention, but economies with government being the primary driver of economic growth through government debt.

[Doug_Morris]

On 12/22/2024 at 2:11 AM, human_murda said:

Objectivism promotes the contradiction that is the “separation of the state and the economy” by never talking in any detail about how governments are to be funded

The main reason that Objectivism has not gone into detail about how governments are to be funded is that it is the last reform to be advocated.  We must cut government back to its proper functions before we can reform how it is financed.

However, Ayn Rand did give a general indication of how government is to be funded, with an example of what might be part of it.  This was in her essay “Government Financing in a Free Society”, reprinted in The Virtue of Selfishness.

[Boydstun]

Government funding without initiation of force is feasible, as here, but it requires Objectivists and other libertarians to correct their thought on property rights in land (that entire economic factor), as here. Locke and his political-theory heirs were wrong in thinking that individuals come to state formation (in analytical device or historically) with their rights to property in land already perfected.

That American flag on the moon is a mixed-economy flag. Technological high attainments in the US are a joint result of private enterprise and federal government (especially military) research and development. The attainments of Space X are also dependent on government contracts. (The brotherhood of private and military innovation seems as old as ancient Mesopotamia.) There is not enough free-market demand to make manned space travel viable. It is our exquisite machines like Mars Explorer we should send, if anything, not humans.

Prior to the great expansion of railroads after the US civil war, American capitalism was pretty close to having a separation of economy and state. Railroads required invoking the Eminent Domain clause (hardly a separation-of-economy-and-state tenet). Railroad companies got richer than the government, bought State governments for economic advantages, and so forth. Rand’s fictional character Nat Taggart would not have been working under a capitalism that was laissez-faire.

Rand had long thought of governments as unable to produce anything without a private factor originating everything. In a draft for We the Living, she had Kira and Leo marvel at subways they had learned of in New York (apparently assumed to be possible due to freedom of enterprise, direct or indirect), and the author took such a thing to be impossible in Communism. Before the novel was completed, the Moscow subway (with slave labor) was completed, and Rand scratched that bit she had drafted. Then again, Rand had it that the Manhattan Project was brought to success at root by only private innovations from free minds. And she put the same slant on the Apollo 11 moon shot. 

human–murda, thank you for all the information and effort you have put into this good discussion. I was wondering about the communist factions you are aware of there: do they hold to and promulgate economic determinism? Dialectical materialism? Also, did most new land owners there end up keeping it or did they sell it?

In the US, democratic socialism has been motivated by belief in moral precepts of Jesus, not Marx. It includes abolition of much private property, of privately owned industries, and of making money without exerting physical labor. But owning your own home is fine, if you are that fortunate. If it were ever implemented I doubt it could bring much besides stagnation, because of the need for some economically chancy ventures and for some dynamical markets in capital goods. I know less about American communism. Some important court cases, I think, expanded separation of church and state here due to suits brought by communist citizens. My impression is that Castro instituted real communism in our neighbor Cuba, which improved literacy, but entailed a police state and economic ruin.