L10n master

ar-EG/Economics and Ethics of Private Property Studies in Political Economy and Philosophy/03_p01_ch05_03.md

@@ -46,7 +46,7 @@ Since interest, according to Keynes, is a purely monetary phenomenon, it is only
 
 It is “comparatively easy to make capital goods so abundant that the marginal efficiency of capital is zero (and) this may be the most sensible way of gradually getting rid of many of the objectional features of capitalism.”[^47] “There are no intrinsic reasons for the scarcity of capital.”[^48] Rather, it is “possible for communal saving through the agency of the State to be maintained at a level where it ceases to be scarce.”[^49]
 
-Don’t worry that this would imply that no maintenance or replacement of capital would be needed any longer (for, if this were the case, capital goods would still be scarce and hence command a price), and capital goods instead would have to be “free goods” in the same sense in which air is usually “free.” Don’t worry that if capital goods were no longer scarce, then consumer goods could no longer be scarce either (for, if they were, the means employed to produce them would have to be scarce, too). And don’t worry that in this Garden of Eden, which Keynes promises to establish within one generation (why so long?!), there would no longer be any use for money. For, as he informs us, “I am myself impressed by the great social advantages of increasing the stock of capital until it ceases to be scarce.”[^50] Who would dare disagree with this![^51]
+Don’t worry that this would imply that no maintenance or replacement of capital would be needed any longer (for, if this were the case, capital goods would still be scarce and hence command a price), and capital goods instead would have to be “free goods” in the same sense in which air is usually “free.” Don’t worry that if capital goods were no longer scarce, then consumer goods could no longer be scarce either (for, if they were, the means employed to produce them would have to be scarce, too). And don’t worry that in this Garden of Eden, which Keynes promises to establish within one generation (why so long?!), there would no longer be any use for money. For, as he informs us, “I am myself impressed by the great social advantages of increasing the stock of capital until it ceases to be scarce.”[^50] Who would dare disagree with this! [^51]
 
 Yet more is to come. Because, as Keynes sees it, there are some obstacles on the path toward paradise. For one thing, the gold standard stands in the way, because it makes the expansion of credit impossible (or difficult at least, in that a credit expansion would lead to an outflow of gold and a subsequent economic contraction). Hence Keynes’s repeated polemics against this institution.[^52] Furthermore, there is the just explained problem of his own making: that a lower interest rate supposedly increases and decreases investment simultaneously. And it is to get out of this logical mess that Keynes comes up with a conspiracy theory: For, while the interest rate must be reduced to zero so as to eliminate scarcity, as we were just told, the lower the interest rate the lower also the reward for parting with liquidity. The lower the interest rate, that is to say, the lower the incentive for capitalists to invest, because their profits will be reduced accordingly. Thus, they will try to undermine, and conspire against, any attempt to resurrect the Garden of Eden.
 

ar-EG/Economics and Ethics of Private Property Studies in Political Economy and Philosophy/info.yml

@@ -171,10 +171,10 @@ resources:
 targets:
   - 
     target: [ ]
-    name: article
-    reset_footer_active: false
-    reset_footer_depth: 0
+    name: book
+    reset_footer_active: true
+    reset_footer_depth: 2
     clear_page_active: true
-    clear_page_depth: 1
+    clear_page_depth: 2
     toc_depth: 3
 version: "0.1.2"

ar-EG/The Myth of National Defense Essays on the Theory and History of Security Production/info.yml

@@ -3,18 +3,6 @@ content_files:
   - 
     - intro.md
     - ""
-  - 
-    - sec1.md
-    - ""
-  - 
-    - sec2.md
-    - ""
-  - 
-    - sec3.md
-    - ""
-  - 
-    - sec4.md
-    - ""
 translation:
   language: ar-EG
   is_translation: true
@@ -83,7 +71,7 @@ resources:
 targets:
   - 
     target: [ ]
-    name: article
+    name: book
     reset_footer_active: false
     reset_footer_depth: 0
     clear_page_active: true

ar-EG/Universally Preferable Behaviour/info.yml

@@ -162,10 +162,10 @@ resources:
 targets:
   - 
     target: [ ]
-    name: article
-    reset_footer_active: false
-    reset_footer_depth: 0
+    name: book
+    reset_footer_active: true
+    reset_footer_depth: 1
     clear_page_active: true
-    clear_page_depth: 1
-    toc_depth: 3
+    clear_page_depth: 3
+    toc_depth: 2
 version: "0.1.2"

ar-SA/Economics and Ethics of Private Property Studies in Political Economy and Philosophy/01_pref2nd_ed.md

@@ -1,10 +1,10 @@
 ## تمهيد لطبعة الثانية
 
-The first edition of *The Economics and Ethics of Private Property*, published in 1993, has been out of print for several years. For some time and from many sides I have been urged to prepare a new edition, and Llewellyn Rockwell has graciously offered the Ludwig von Mises Institute to serve as its publisher.
+الطبعة الأولى من * اقتصاد وأخلاقيات الملكية الخاصة </ 0>، التي نشرت في عام 1993، وقد تم طباعتها لعدة سنوات. لبعض الوقت، ومن كثير من الجانبين قد تم حثثت بإعداد طبعة جديدة، وعرضت "Llewellyn von Rockwell" تكرم Ludwig Von Mises معهد لتكون بمثابة الناشر.</p> 
 
-*The Economics and Ethics of Private Property* was dedicated to my teacher and mentor, Murray N. Rothbard, with whom I had been closely associated during the last ten years of his life, first as a visiting scholar at the Brooklyn Polytechnic Institute in New York City and after 1986 as a colleague at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas. The year 2005 marks the tenth anniversary of Rothbard’s death. Thus, it seemed a most appropriate time to honor Murray anew with this second edition.
+*الاقتصاد والأخلاقيات للملكية الخاصة* وخصص لبلدي معلم ومعلمة، Murray N. Rothbard ، مع الذين كنت قد ترتبط ارتباطاً وثيقا خلال السنوات العشر الأخيرة من حياته، أولاً زائرا في معهدBrooklyn Polythechnic فيNew york City وبعد عام 1986 كزميل في جامعة نيفادا، Las Vegas. عام 2005 يصادف الذكرى العاشرة للموت في Rothbard. وهكذا، فقد بدأ وقت أنسب لتكريم Murray مجددا مع هذه الطبعة الثانية.
 
-The present edition of *The Economics and Ethics of Private Property* is enlarged. It adds four articles written after the original publication of the book but related thematically to its central subject matter Of the economic and ethic rationale of the institution of private property—chapters 6, 7, 8, and 15. The opportunity of a new edition has also been used to make significant editorial improvements and revisions.
+هو الموسع الطبعة الحالية *"الاقتصاد"* و "الأخلاقيات للملكية الخاصة". وتضيف أربع مواد مكتوبة بعد نشر الكتاب الأصلي ولكن ذات صلة مواضيعي موضوعها المركزي للمنطق الاقتصادي وأخلاقيات المؤسسة الملكية الخاصة – الفصول 6، 7، 8، و 15. كما استخدمت أيضا الفرصة لطبعة جديدة لإجراء تحسينات كبيرة في التحرير والتنقيحات.
 
 Hans Hermann Hoppe
 

ar-SA/Economics and Ethics of Private Property Studies in Political Economy and Philosophy/02_pref1st_ed.md

@@ -1,13 +1,13 @@
-## Preface to the First Edition
+## مقدمة الطبعة الأولى
 
-The collapse of socialism across Eastern Europe—as manifested most dramatically by the events of the forever memorable November 9, 1989, when the Germans of East and West reunited, moved and overjoyed, on top of the Berlin Wall—has added more support and urgency to the central thesis of this volume than I had ever hoped for.
+انهيار الاشتراكية عبر أوروبا الشرقية – كما تجلى معظم بشكل كبير بأحداث الأبد لا تنسى 9 نوفمبر 1989، عندما شمل الألمان من الشرق والغرب، نقل، وسعادة غامرة، فوق "جدار Berlin" – قد أضاف المزيد من الدعم والحاجة الملحة إلى الأطروحة المركزية لهذا الحجم مما كنت أمل لمن أي وقت مضى.
 
-Whether the following studies deal with economic topics such as employment, interest, money, banking, business cycles, taxes, public goods, or growth; with philosophical problems as the foundations of knowledge, and of economics and ethics in particular; or the reconstruction and theoretical explanation of historical and sociological phenomena such as exploitation, the rise and fall of civilizations, international politics, war, imperialism, and the role of ideas and ideological movements in the course of social evolution—each ultimately contributes to but one conclusion: The right to private property is an indisputably valid, absolute principle of ethics and the basis for continuous “optimal” economic progress. To rise from the ruins of socialism and overcome the stagnation of the Western welfare states, nothing will suffice but the uncompromising privatization of all socialized, that is, government, property and the establishment of a contractual society based on the recognition of the absoluteness of private property rights.
+ما إذا كانت الدراسات التالية تتناول المواضيع الاقتصادية مثل العمالة، والفائدة، المال، المصرفية، دورات الأعمال، الضرائب، السلع العامة، أو النمو؛ مع المشاكل الفلسفية الأسس للمعرفة، والاقتصاد والأخلاق وبخاصة؛ أو بإعادة الإعمار والشرح النظري لظواهر تاريخية واجتماعية مثل الاستغلال، وصعود وسقوط الحضارات والسياسة الدولية، والحرب، والإمبريالية، ودور الأفكار والحركات الأيديولوجية خلال عام التطور الاجتماعي – كل يسهم في نهاية المطاف ولكن النتيجة واحدة: الحق في الملكية الخاصة مبدأ صحيح بلا منازع، والمطلقة للأخلاق وأساس لاستمرار التقدم الاقتصادي "الأمثل". لترتفع من تحت أنقاض الاشتراكية والتغلب على الركود الذي أصاب دول الرفاه الغربي، لا شيء لن يكون كافياً ولكن الخصخصة لا هوادة فيها لكل اجتماعيا، أي الحكومة والملكية وإقامة مجتمع التعاقدية على أساس الاعتراف تعيق حقوق الملكية الخاصة.
 
-In writing the following studies I received help from many sides. Special thanks go to my wife Margaret, who again took on the task of de-Germanizing my English; to Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr., president of the Ludwig von Mises Institute, and to Burton S. Blumert, president of the Center for Libertarian Studies, for their continuing support of my work; and to my friend David Gordon, for his numerous invaluable suggestions and comments.
+في كتابة الدراسات التالية تلقي تعليمات من العديد من الجانبين. نتوجه بالشكر الخاص إلى زوجتي مارغريت، قاموا مرة أخرى بمهمة دي-جيرمانيزينج اللغة الإنجليزية؛ الى Llewellyn H. Rockwell, "، Jr"، رئيس Ludwig Von Mises معهد، وإلى Burton S. Blumeet، رئيس مركز "دراسات التحررية"، على مواصلة دعم عملي؛ وإلى صديقي David Gordon، لأن العديد من الاقتراحات لا تقدر بثمن والتعليقات.
 
-My largest debt is to Ludwig von Mises and Murray N. Rothbard, the twentieth century’s two greatest-though much neglected-economists and social philosophers. While I never met Ludwig von Mises, and indeed had not heard of his name until after his death, I am fortunate to have been closely associated with Murray Rothbard for the past six years, first in New York City, and since 1986 as colleagues at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas. Apart from the intellectual debt that I owe him, words cannot express my personal gratitude. His wisdom, insight, kindness, enthusiasm, and unflagging encouragement have been a continuous inspiration to me. It is, therefore, to him that this volume is dedicated.
+أكبر ديوني الى Ludwig Von Mises ميزس و Murray N. Rothbard، القرن الحادي والعشرين في اثنين من أكبر-على الرغم من أن الكثير من الاقتصاديين مهملة والفلاسفة الاجتماعية. في حين أنني لم يلتق قط Ludwig Von Mises، وبالفعل لم أسمع عن اسمه حتى بعد وفاته، وأنا محظوظ أن ترتبط وثيقا Murray Rothbard على مدى السنوات الست الماضية، لأول مرة في مدينة New York، ومنذ عام 1986 كزملاء في جامعة Nevada, Las Vegas. وبصرف النظر عن الدين الفكري الذي أدين به، لا يمكن للكلمات أن تعبر عن امتناني الشخصي. وكانت حكمته والبصيرة، والعطف، والحماس، والتشجيع لا يفتر مصدر الهام مستمر بالنسبة لي. أنها، لذلك، عليه أن يكرس هذا الحجم.
 
-Hans-Hermann Hoppe
+Hans Hermann Hoppe
 
 *Las Vegas, Nevada, 1993*

ar-SA/Economics and Ethics of Private Property Studies in Political Economy and Philosophy/03_p01.md

@@ -1 +1 @@
-# Economics
+# الاقتصاد

ar-SA/Economics and Ethics of Private Property Studies in Political Economy and Philosophy/03_p01_ch01_01.md

@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
-## Fallacies of the Public Goods Theory and the Production of Security
+## مغالطات نظرية السلع العامة وإنتاج الأمن
 
-In 1849, at a time when classical liberalism was still the dominant ideological force and “economist” and “socialist” were generally considered antonyms, Gustave de Molinari, a renowned Belgian economist, wrote,
+في 1849, في وقت عندما كانت الليبرالية الكلاسيكية لا تزال القوة الأيديولوجية المهيمنة و "عالم الاقتصاد " و "الاشتراكية" واعتبرت عموما المتضادات، Gustave de Molianari، خبير اقتصادي Belgian مشهور، كتب،
 
-> If there is one well-established truth in political economy, it is this: That in all cases, of all commodities that serve to provide for the tangible or intangible need of the consumer, it is in the consumer’s best interest that labor and trade remain free, because the freedom of labor and trade have as their necessary and permanent result the maximum reduction of price. And this: That the interest of the consumer of any commodity whatsoever should always prevail over the interests of the producer. Now, in pursuing these principles, one arrives at this rigorous conclusion: That the production of security should in the interest of consumers of this intangible commodity remain subject to the law of free competition. Whence it follows: That no government should have the right to prevent another government from going into competition with it, or require consumers of security to come exclusively to it for this commodity.[^1]
+> إذا كان هناك حقيقة واحدة راسخة في الاقتصاد السياسي، وهذا: أنه في جميع الحالات، لجميع السلع الأساسية التي من شأنها توفير الحاجة الملموسة أو غير الملموسة للمستهلك، في مصلحة المستهلك أن حزب العمل والتجارة تظل حرة، نظراً أن حرية العمل والتجارة بهم نتيجة ضرورية ودائمة الحد الأقصى للسعر. وهذا: أن مصلحة المستهلك لأي سلعة على الإطلاق ينبغي أن تسود دائماً على مصالح المنتجين. Now, in pursuing these principles, one arrives at this rigorous conclusion: That the production of security should in the interest of consumers of this intangible commodity remain subject to the law of free competition. Whence it follows: That no government should have the right to prevent another government from going into competition with it, or require consumers of security to come exclusively to it for this commodity.[^1]
 
 He comments on this whole argument by saying, “Either this is logical and true, or else the principles on which economic science is based are invalid.”[^2]