Email Message
This form does not yet contain any fields.
    The Will to Create

    Entries in economic collapse (6)


    Maybe there will be a collapse and maybe not

    I've written here many times about a potential national collapse if we continue down this road of government central planning and social engineering, but the collpase could be a century away, or it could never happen. America could simply transform into a country governed by tyrants lording over Americans who grow accustomed to a lower standard of living and very little liberty.

    I've also written about my hope that people will wake up and realize that progressivism and government interventionism are destroying our economy and bogging us down in foreign entanglements. Some libertarians and anarcho-capitalist types comment that our government will not change, and that it'll take a complete breakdown for things to change. I understand where they're coming from, but I also think that expecting a collapse can be an excuse for inaction. One of the problems I have with Albert Jay Nock's writings is that he was certain government would not change from its original merchant state system of interventionism and control -- for Nock, his criticisms, even though they were enlightening and powerful, were little more than an intellectual hobby.

    I believe we have to do everything we can to affect political change, because even if a libertarian paradise is highly unlikely, we can keep progressives from having their way and being in the driver seat when there's an economic collapse, if there is one. One belief is that after a collapse, Americans will be ready for a libertarian society, but that is only one possibility. It's more likely that progressives will blame the collapse on lack of control over the economy. I hate to refer to Hitler, but it's how Nazism was chosen by Germans over socialism or the Catholics's solution to economic collapse. Read Mises' Omnipotent Government. The Nazis convinced the German people Nazi solutions could make things better by contolling more of German enterprise so that everyone was employed one way or another.

    When people are desperate they look for solutions, and this is when the Authoritarian Solution is most attractive. Some Strong Leader comes along and says that he or she will make things happen, that rules are suspended because the welfare of the people is more important than rules. Extreme problems require extreme solutions, and, if the people want stability and security, they'll abide by the commands of the One who can provide stability and security. This is more likely than people craving a free market, especially when so few with a prominent, public voice are promoting the principles of limited government and a free market.

    The problem is that while we wait for a collapse kids are being taught daily that a free market is an evil, that it's a jungle in which the strong destroy the rest. Kids are taught that government intervention is necessary to achieve equality and social justice. Capitalism is a system of theft, a rigged game that favors the rich and powerful at the expense of the poor and middle class. This is beat into the skulls of kids from an early age by teachers, media, movies, politicians, and, often, the parents.

    This is why I believe we must do all we can to keep the language of liberty and the principles of a free market alive. Working for political change along libertarian lines will assure that these ideas are lost forever.


    Libertarianism missing an opportunity

    Ron Paul has faded into the background. Cato writers and managers have said their purpose is not activism. The Libertarian Party is stale with no innovative attempts to generate radical change and rally people to action. The Tea Party talks about conservatism, but not libertarianism. All those on the Right who first claimed affinity with libertarian/free market/limited government ideas are now capitulating to criticisms that libertarians don't care and are only concerned with protecting the bank accounts of rich, white, capitalist pigs, or, they, libertarians, support gay marriage and legalization of drugs, so there can be no association with such libertine extremists.

    Among self-described libertarians, after media associated libertarians with rightwing extremists, many have called themselves liberaltarians or Left-libertarians or some have simply said they are liberals after all, just not totally liberal. As a matter of fact, they claim labels suck, so they just go the pragmatic route, which looks a lot like the modern liberal route. They won't say they support Obama, but they certainly don't support Romney, and the Libertarian Party is nothing, so...besides, Obama has turned out to be a Centrist, and that's not so bad.

    There are no libertarian leaders, except perhaps Ron Paul, but Paul is not a radical -- America's situation calls for radical action, but radical change is seen as madness by the political class. The fact is that there are very few real libertarians left who are of the classical liberal/free market/limited government/non-interventionist variety. There's a lot of rhetoric about economic liberty and lessening the role of government in our lives, but there are few libertarians who will fight for radical change, and that's what it will take to make any significant changes to our statist system. 

    Being a libertarian means standing against the status quo, the political class, the establishments of both parties, the State machine, the media, most major universities, Hollywood, military/industrial complex hawks, bigots, statists on the Right and Left. Libertarians are attacked from all sides and misrepresented on a regular basis -- or completely ignored. There's no quick rewards being a libertarian because there's no hope of political influence in the foreseeable future. Libertarians are outcasts. Yet, libertarians are closer to the spirit and intellectual foundation of America as it was founded than modern liberals or conservatives. I quess we can say the country has moved on from that intellectual foundation and spirit, taking the Hamiltonian route, and now the State has grown to represent the hope of the future, the modern Way to justice, equality and security, rather than free people working together and competing sans government meddling. The idea of a minimal government that protects basic rights so that commerce can take place without fear of coercion is not considered viable anymore in America.

    We've tried the mixed economy but the State continues to encroach and gain more control over the economy. As we find out, the more control over the economy that the State takes for itself, more general control is necessary. Dissent must be marginalized, and, to do this, privacy must be violated. Property rights must become of less or no import in a Statist system. Conformity becomes necessary as small enterprises which innovate upset the status quo and prevent well ordered economic management. A Statist system doesn't like surprises or spontaneous change. Statists must allow only the activity that fits within the overall plans and furthers the goals of the State. Innovation and creativity are discouraged, and if innovation and creativity are persistent, then they'll be blocked by regulation and law. All deviations from the plans are viewed as attempts by individuals to selfishly go their own ways and gain financially at the expense of others. In the Statist system there will be the managers and the managed, but since the new managers are State managers, they'll manage with compassion and fairness, so that justice is maintained and equality constantly sought.

    The reason libertarians are not a political force is because libertarians don't seek political power -- libertarians seek to tear down political power and release the power of individuals in a free market. Any serious group of libertarians who actually organize to bring down the Statist power structures would be classified as enemies of the State, so it makes it even harder for libertarians to organize, because the thought of challenging the State and becoming an enemy of the State is daunting -- the intimidation factor is powerful and effective. When all meaningful power is within the State structure, then special interest groups are formed to seek benefit and favor from the State managers. Self-sufficient individuals keep their heads down and simply do their own things within the rules without causing waves. Not many people are cut out to become revolutionaries, and, besides, doesn't the State provide security? Why should the people tear down the structures of power when this power is needed in an uncertain, scary world? Isn't it best to trust that the managers of power will not abuse power? Yes, managers of power will always enrich themselves, but as long as they are helping the populace in need, why should anyone risk retaliation by the State and become marked as an enemy of the State, a rabble-rouser, a threat to security and order?

    Can't we simply work through the political system and vote in representatives who will prevent power from being abused? I suppose it's possible, but the problem is that too many Americans are taking too much from the system and not producing enough to sustain a large nation, and once the dependents reach a greater percentage than can be supported, the nation begins collapsing. Even the managers of power cannot prevent reality from having its say. Ask the managers of power in Greece. It doesn't matter why dependents are created -- it could be that productivity is such that not as many people are needed in the labor market -- it can be government regulations cause an economy to become stagnant -- it can be because most people will not work if they can find a way to live without working, especially if their basic needs are met without a fulltime job, and they can work under the table when needed to supplement government welfare. It might be politically unpopular to discuss the motives of welfare recipients, but reality doesn't care about political correctness. For whatever reasons, if dependents increase and producers of wealth decrease, then nations move toward collapse. Middle class and corporate welfare are even greater destroyers of wealth when what is taken is greater than what's produced.

    When nations begin to collapse, they turn on the dependents. Statists need dependents in the beginning to gain power, but when dependents begin to threaten the power structure, power managers lose their compassion -- positions are threatened and dependents are forced to earn their keep, even if it means the State will build roads and dig ditches, anything to stop the bleeding and mounting debt. But dependents will not go from no work to hard work without resistance. When middle class benfits are threatened, the middle class will push back and politicians will have to decide between economic reality and political survival. When protected corporations are threatened and then bled of cash to support the Statist system, they will try to find another way, some other political power to protect them. The various groups of dependents might even form other political parties that promise to keep the welfare state intact. There will be vicious political battles, with everyone fighting over dwindling resources. At this point, like Rome and Britain and other failed empires, the game is over and it's just a matter of time before the falling apart is complete.

    But that's all nonsense, right? That can't happen in America. Libertarians are extremists and their paranoia is such a downer. No, it appears that libertarians had a minute of attention and now they're relegated back to obscurity on the fringe. Just read the above! Who wants to listen to that? How long does a collapse take? It could be another fifty years. Why worry now?


    Political awareness and the coming crisis - Thomas E. Woods' Rollback

    Media and the political class practically ignore the most serious problems facing America. Coverage of politics is a game, but politics is really a side concern -- there are realities we all must face and the Information Age has created various routes for information to bypass traditional media outlets.

    Even though the public is more aware of our problems, most Americans continue to rely on government to fix the problems through more intervention and central planning - however, government has caused most of the problems. Regardless of statist mental gymnastics to assuage fear regarding SS, Medicare, Medicaid and pensions, these entitlements loom over us like a large sword.

    One pertinent aspect of the 2012 elections which justifies close coverage is that the stakes are higher than they've ever been, and this is why we can no longer afford status quo results. The time has come for a total housecleaning in Washington DC. Representatives with integrity and a clear understanding of the coming crisis are needed in order to make the radical systemic changes necessary to avoid collapse. It's no longer a political game, it's a matter of national survival.

    Everyone concerned about the future of America should read Thomas E. Woods book, Rollback. It's a straightforward analysis of our problems and what's needed to stop the current trajectory of government spending. For balance and contrast, read Rollback, then read anything Paul Krugman has written in the last 5 years, then decide which you think is a honest account of our national economic/political condition


    Reality always wins

    This is something I say quite often, especially when I hear "perception is reality". Perception in the US political class is everything, but for the rest of the world, the reality of our economic condition and future prospects are what matter. Although the US economy is still one of the few economies in the world that's productive and globally significant, we are not shielded from reality and immune to financial collapse.

    Our statist system is infected with the hubris of power, and the power elite have developed a mindset that America can continue to borrow and spend without consequences. There are constitutional limitations, which as we've seen have been surpassed, and then there are limitations placed on us by reality, which can't be surpassed without immediate consequences. America has tried to surpass the limitations placed on us by reality, so we can expect consequences.


    More dire economic warning

    Serious people have to step forward or America will not survive. It's past the political games.