Barack Obama was able to capture the election, as he easily carried the media glow of celebrity through the night. Even worse, McCain attempted a dismal "Country First" campaign that even isolated conservatives by his servant-slave-state pronounciations. But even Barack Obama's CHANGE campaign openly enumerated its corporate agenda. Famed economist Milton Friedman strongly objected to such political imagery. In his interpretation, the idea of a sheltering nanny state wreaked of totalitarianism. And he in his writing is unfraid of calling it so.
In Milton Friedman's 1962 masterpiece Capitalism and Freedom, he addresses the challenges facing modern society, much which, its institutions have helped to create. In a benevolent and just fashion, Friedman conveys the major benefits society has reaped from liberalism and the laissez faire culture our society is rooted in. He speaks of the liberation from authoritarian rule which humanistic movements in the Rennaissance and Enlightenment championed. This progress in thought revolutionized society from a shell of slaves and masters into a world of independent action and destiny.
Much prosperity and advance can be celebrated. But, Friedman argues that with the rise of the corporate nation state since the 1930's, free man's progress is now threatened by a new form of innocuously phrased authoritarian rule. The power to heavily tax, distort monetary value, and make major closed international trade agreements serve an unfree nationalist agenda that smacks of fraud. In Friedman's delicate, sensible and logical way, the reader is left to ponder the fate of freedom in practicality. Convincingly so, putting into practice Friedman's arguments for allowing non-regulated open-market solutions would greatly improve our lives.
Education is an invaluable measure of a People. It is the basis for many's status and well-being. Even the success of their future depends on their attainment of education. But, in a nation where our Constitution explicity leaves all matters of local education to local authorities, it is astonishing to think of the shallow federal programs for education. Sadly, as Friedman points out, much federal meddling ammounts to little educational advances and in most cases, contributes to the demise of educational standards.
Calling for local communities to voluntarily cooperate to form schools with admission open to all, Friedman claims that much competitiveness would be maintained. For they would be a "shareholder" in this cooperative effort and care for the success in education above other nearby schools. Friedman stresses that "this would eliminate government machinery required to collect tax from all residence" (87). Thus, would be a just in a free and open society.
Friedman does concede to some federal aid to extreme considerations in which one's livelihood is now entirely depended on the state. Wisely, and in the name of laissez faire, he argues for "a combination of public and private schools" (93). He continues that, "It would permit competition to develop, the development and improvement of all schools would thus be stimulated. The injection of healthy competition would do much to promote a healthy variety of schools" (93). But private schools would eventually excel because once controlled by the state, "the parent or local community comes to exsercise little control" (95). Throughout his writing, Friedman's tone smacks of well-thought out indignance of the present status quo.
His writing screams out like a defender of a great unintangible prize. But, his steadfast belief that "government intervention reduces freedom and limits voluntary cooperation" (113) convinces of the power of a voluntary society. His further assertion that, "in a society based on free discussion, the appropriate recourse is for me to seek to persuade them that their tastes are bad and that they should change their views and their behavior, not to use coercive power to enforce my tastes and my attitudes on others" (111). The well-meaning virtue weaved through his work is all the more a testament to the principles of liberalism.
For now government affects society in boundless ways. Friedman asserts that
"the direction in which policy is now moving, of permitting corporations to make contributions for charitable purposes and allowing deductions for income tax, is a step in direction of creating a true divorce between ownership and control and of undermining the basic nature and character of our society. It is a step away from an individualistic society and toward the corporate state" (136).
Friedman continues on to champion the free market and its "invisible hand" as a critical link necessary to unleash the goodness and creativity of man. In describing his process he argues that in a long term look the United States' progress (as of 1962) in technological advances, living standards, and social culture proves that freedom works. Friedman explains that,
"The United States has continued to progress; its citizens have become better fed, better clothed, better housed, and better transported; class and social distinctions have narrowed; minority groups have become less disadvantaged; popular culture has advanced by leaps and bounds. All this has been the product of the initiative and drive of individuals co-operating through the free market. Government measures have hampered not helped this development. We have been able to afford and surmount these measures only because of the extraordinary fecundity of the market. The invisible hand has been more potent for progress than the visible hand for retrogression" (200).
As government has grown larger and more intrusive than ever under the cleavership of George W. Bush, it is frightening to see what the future holds now that the private banks are now directing our federal government. Through the guise of the now dictatorial Secretary of the Treasury, the banks have their own "President", able to command the economy at will. After Congress voted down the initial horrendously hashed Bailout, we have both Obama and McCain to thank for the media wind they used to steal from the poor to give to the super-elite rich of the greater Goldman-Sachs community. Such fraud still stings for the average losing American. After all, considering the history of America's government in the first decade of the 21st century, maybe favoring the consciously guided path of laissez faire freedom isn't such a bad idea.
Showing posts with label Milton Friedman. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Milton Friedman. Show all posts
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
The Genius of Freedom
As the behemoth known as the federal government doubled in size since 1997, it is no surprise that Americans have incrementally lost more freedom than was even conceivable in the past century. Yet, as Election Day 2008 draws nearer, few have made the connection betwen the centralization of economic and political power and the loss of human rights in America.
Milton Friedman in Capitalism and Freedom once wrote, that the "free-market as a system of economic freedom and a necessary condition for political freedom," (4) must be preserved at all costs, despite well-meaning popular demands for state intervention in education and healthcare. In Friedrich A. Hayek's masterpiece The Road to Serfdom, he dismisses the impracticality of socialism while dissecting its covert attack on liberty. In brilliant prose, he lays out the true meaning of nineteenth-century liberalism, highlighting its success and goal toward complete individual liberation. In a clear and concise form, Hayek makes a strong intellectual argument for the preservation of the free-market and through this, autonomy inherited through individual and local means. Pointing to the authoritarian nature of socialist means to achieve ends, it becomes ever too obvious to the reader that Hayek's defense of liberty remains of the highest moral perogative and ultimately necessary to achieve a free society.
While the aims of socialism are often noble and emotionally endearing to all, its vision of justice and equality falls short of its goals due to the coercive means which must be used to attain its ultimate goals. Instead of revolutionizing society with a change of consciousness, (the only true method of change), socialism relies on ancient iron-fisted dictatorial methods. At the barrel of a gun, one, a victim of success, is coerced to relinquishing his or her rewards of hard work to give to those incapable in their present capacity of attaining such wealth. Like the Church tithe of Old Europe, the government sets moral absolutes on the People. Hayek claims that while such "values" are imposed upon the People, "they must become their beliefs," (153) essentially limiting free thought and giving the State the absoluteness of divinity in all of its dealings. Such a road is dangerous, especially considering our present governing coalition, who mandates war, torture, and imprisonment not only in America's local communities, but also in distant nations.
Furthermore, the government mandated idea of collectivism, so-termed "group rights" undermines the autonomy of the individual and rejects the reality of personal decision making which affects all interactions in life. It is this collectivism which has created centralized power and threatens our free existence.
Whether the group consists of "the poor", "the middle class", or the "corporate CEOs" (now seen in the $2 trillion+ Bank Bailout Bill), our fredom to personally choose our own fate is destroyed. The fact that "discrimination between members and nonmembers of closed groups" (214) now exists poses the political reality we face. It is thus in these type of aimed conglomerates that "collectivists must create power - power over men wielded by other men - of a magnitude never before known" (144) which wildly discriminates and has no tolerance for liberty or independence of thought. Hayek describes its effects as that which "creates a degre of dependence scarcely distinguishable from slavery" (146). Thus strikes the death knell for a free society.
Thus, forces beyond the individual have controlled American society since the creation of The Federal Reserve System and the never ratified Sixteenth Amendment in the fateful year of 1913. Even worse, many of America's trade agreements (G8 summits, WTO, GATT, NAFTA, etc.), limit competition, discourage free trade, and structure society along collectivist, protectionist lines all ot the detriment of the creativity and ingenuity of the individual. Hayek describes this "'sharing' of markets" as "the [conglomerate] control of investment and development of natural resources" (229). In fact, with the rise of the multi-national coroporation, little has been done in government's most essential economic function, regulating monopoly.
Without competition, freedom is limited and starved for new outlets for creation. Today, our government discourages ingenuity, progress, and new ideas. In the interest of preserving the status quo, it now rejects freedom and adheres to a fascist ideal of the organization of the most personal and intimate workings of society. Hayek writes, "the machinery of monopoly becomes identical with the machinery of the state, and the state itself becomes more and more identified with the interests of those who run things than with the interests of the people in general" (198). Thus, is the present tyranny of The Establishment.
While the abolition of the State, (and along with it the demise of The Establishment), may seem an answer to these problems, anarchy does little to work as an impartial arbiter, a watchdog for personal liberty. A limited government is essential to preserving the rule of law, and holding all accountable to their actions. But, to safeguard liberty and give a framework to empower the People, it is necessary for the People to independently obtain their own material supply and social well-being in battling the tyranny of the established "aristocracy". For when government is no longer impartial, but rather a "group rights" conduit for power, its essential purpose is thwarted and more liberty is lost. For it is individual rights, "the system of private property [and private production] is the most important guaranty of fredom, not only for those who own property, but scarcely less than those who do not" (103). While it may seem incredulous that such rights defend the liberty of the landless and propertyless masses, their ability to decide their rent, employment, personal purchases and even where they choose to passt heir precious limited time all effect the future of these independent entities, and ultimately, the destiny of the People.
It should not be ignored that we all derive our life from the land of Earth, and without the ability to freely navigate and acquire its bounty, our benefit from its vast resources will be diminished and the natural state of man will be denied. Total control of the Earth by the monopoly, and in particular the coercive Establishment is the gravest threat to humanity.
Thus, such developments have now distorted the noble Enlightenment-logic behind liberalism of the "Golden Age" of thought embodied in our republic. Now, a collusion of high and mighty powers control our future. More frightening, as our monetary currency further loses its once impeccable legitimacy, the threat of inflation rips at the heart of freedom and prosperity for a large majority of our citizenry. For Hayek warns of the oppression of poverty; "It should never be forgotten that the one decisive factor in the rise of totalitarianism on the Continent (1940s Nazi Germany) [...] is the existence of a large recently disposessed middle class" (209). More than ever, America's backbone, the middle class, faces annihilation of liberty; economic, political and personal. Our very concept of liberty njow hangs in the balance.
Yet, as Ron Paul once said, "freedom is popular" and Americans' thirst for it and its rewards will never be satisfied. And rightly so! On the brink of the New World Order, we must think about what we value. Faced with freedom or security, many will clamor for security. But, even its guarantee of being "taken care" of is far from the reality of life. Rather, those that do not desire entitlement to physical goods or services, but focus only on the need for freedom, will fight for the good will of all.
Thus, socialism "must be regarded as a reactionary movement, the decisive change which has taken place in our time and the source of mortal danger to everything a liberal must value" (200). For if we truly believe in the freedom of our actions and contributions to one another, we must vote with liberty as the first and foremost of our aims.
Milton Friedman in Capitalism and Freedom once wrote, that the "free-market as a system of economic freedom and a necessary condition for political freedom," (4) must be preserved at all costs, despite well-meaning popular demands for state intervention in education and healthcare. In Friedrich A. Hayek's masterpiece The Road to Serfdom, he dismisses the impracticality of socialism while dissecting its covert attack on liberty. In brilliant prose, he lays out the true meaning of nineteenth-century liberalism, highlighting its success and goal toward complete individual liberation. In a clear and concise form, Hayek makes a strong intellectual argument for the preservation of the free-market and through this, autonomy inherited through individual and local means. Pointing to the authoritarian nature of socialist means to achieve ends, it becomes ever too obvious to the reader that Hayek's defense of liberty remains of the highest moral perogative and ultimately necessary to achieve a free society.
While the aims of socialism are often noble and emotionally endearing to all, its vision of justice and equality falls short of its goals due to the coercive means which must be used to attain its ultimate goals. Instead of revolutionizing society with a change of consciousness, (the only true method of change), socialism relies on ancient iron-fisted dictatorial methods. At the barrel of a gun, one, a victim of success, is coerced to relinquishing his or her rewards of hard work to give to those incapable in their present capacity of attaining such wealth. Like the Church tithe of Old Europe, the government sets moral absolutes on the People. Hayek claims that while such "values" are imposed upon the People, "they must become their beliefs," (153) essentially limiting free thought and giving the State the absoluteness of divinity in all of its dealings. Such a road is dangerous, especially considering our present governing coalition, who mandates war, torture, and imprisonment not only in America's local communities, but also in distant nations.
Furthermore, the government mandated idea of collectivism, so-termed "group rights" undermines the autonomy of the individual and rejects the reality of personal decision making which affects all interactions in life. It is this collectivism which has created centralized power and threatens our free existence.
Whether the group consists of "the poor", "the middle class", or the "corporate CEOs" (now seen in the $2 trillion+ Bank Bailout Bill), our fredom to personally choose our own fate is destroyed. The fact that "discrimination between members and nonmembers of closed groups" (214) now exists poses the political reality we face. It is thus in these type of aimed conglomerates that "collectivists must create power - power over men wielded by other men - of a magnitude never before known" (144) which wildly discriminates and has no tolerance for liberty or independence of thought. Hayek describes its effects as that which "creates a degre of dependence scarcely distinguishable from slavery" (146). Thus strikes the death knell for a free society.
Thus, forces beyond the individual have controlled American society since the creation of The Federal Reserve System and the never ratified Sixteenth Amendment in the fateful year of 1913. Even worse, many of America's trade agreements (G8 summits, WTO, GATT, NAFTA, etc.), limit competition, discourage free trade, and structure society along collectivist, protectionist lines all ot the detriment of the creativity and ingenuity of the individual. Hayek describes this "'sharing' of markets" as "the [conglomerate] control of investment and development of natural resources" (229). In fact, with the rise of the multi-national coroporation, little has been done in government's most essential economic function, regulating monopoly.
Without competition, freedom is limited and starved for new outlets for creation. Today, our government discourages ingenuity, progress, and new ideas. In the interest of preserving the status quo, it now rejects freedom and adheres to a fascist ideal of the organization of the most personal and intimate workings of society. Hayek writes, "the machinery of monopoly becomes identical with the machinery of the state, and the state itself becomes more and more identified with the interests of those who run things than with the interests of the people in general" (198). Thus, is the present tyranny of The Establishment.
While the abolition of the State, (and along with it the demise of The Establishment), may seem an answer to these problems, anarchy does little to work as an impartial arbiter, a watchdog for personal liberty. A limited government is essential to preserving the rule of law, and holding all accountable to their actions. But, to safeguard liberty and give a framework to empower the People, it is necessary for the People to independently obtain their own material supply and social well-being in battling the tyranny of the established "aristocracy". For when government is no longer impartial, but rather a "group rights" conduit for power, its essential purpose is thwarted and more liberty is lost. For it is individual rights, "the system of private property [and private production] is the most important guaranty of fredom, not only for those who own property, but scarcely less than those who do not" (103). While it may seem incredulous that such rights defend the liberty of the landless and propertyless masses, their ability to decide their rent, employment, personal purchases and even where they choose to passt heir precious limited time all effect the future of these independent entities, and ultimately, the destiny of the People.
It should not be ignored that we all derive our life from the land of Earth, and without the ability to freely navigate and acquire its bounty, our benefit from its vast resources will be diminished and the natural state of man will be denied. Total control of the Earth by the monopoly, and in particular the coercive Establishment is the gravest threat to humanity.
Thus, such developments have now distorted the noble Enlightenment-logic behind liberalism of the "Golden Age" of thought embodied in our republic. Now, a collusion of high and mighty powers control our future. More frightening, as our monetary currency further loses its once impeccable legitimacy, the threat of inflation rips at the heart of freedom and prosperity for a large majority of our citizenry. For Hayek warns of the oppression of poverty; "It should never be forgotten that the one decisive factor in the rise of totalitarianism on the Continent (1940s Nazi Germany) [...] is the existence of a large recently disposessed middle class" (209). More than ever, America's backbone, the middle class, faces annihilation of liberty; economic, political and personal. Our very concept of liberty njow hangs in the balance.
Yet, as Ron Paul once said, "freedom is popular" and Americans' thirst for it and its rewards will never be satisfied. And rightly so! On the brink of the New World Order, we must think about what we value. Faced with freedom or security, many will clamor for security. But, even its guarantee of being "taken care" of is far from the reality of life. Rather, those that do not desire entitlement to physical goods or services, but focus only on the need for freedom, will fight for the good will of all.
Thus, socialism "must be regarded as a reactionary movement, the decisive change which has taken place in our time and the source of mortal danger to everything a liberal must value" (200). For if we truly believe in the freedom of our actions and contributions to one another, we must vote with liberty as the first and foremost of our aims.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
