Big Government (or any Government) Will Never Lead to Prosperity
by Alex Merced
What we constantly get told in some form or other, is that you need government for things to work... but in all reality things work in spite of government. It's like when your a kid and you want something, all the rules in the world won't stop you from trying.
For Example, two countries that are catching up very quickly if not surpassing the US and Europe in economic power are China and India, arguably their governments are bigger and more coercive in scope of control. You can take the economist approach and see that spending as a share of GDP is vastly less than the US, but what I want to take a look as is the rules they govern with, not so much the spending.
China: By having it's non-democratic central government, the current leadership in China has LIBERALIZED a lot of it's economic policy and up until recently has focused on having a savings economy. While it's intervention in the supply of savings has and will cause problems, it couldn't of done it without somewhere to invest those savings in which the US more than glad to play the role which arguably leads to more problems for the US as the Spending economy. Another aspect to take a look at is Hong Kong, once the best bastians of Free Marketeering on the globe which played it's role in sparking the economic growth in the region if not being the Seed that grew into it.
India: This country is known for some of the largest amount of red tape and barriers to entry of any country, with buildings filled with stacks of pending applications for all sorts of things. Yet no one can honestly make the argument that the excessive beuracracy has led to it's quickening growth. So while the same type of Liberalization we see in China isn't in india, a system of corruption and bribery has developed to supercede the beuracracy and foster a freer market... essentially a black market for merely "permission" to enter and participate in commerce.
People will never be diverted from purposeful action no matter what the rules, every rule in the US either eventually is found to have loophole or has some built into it initially. What keeps people honest is their respect for boundries which comes from their own self developed ethical framework. So if we care about what people do in their social and business lives we may affect more change by discussing principles to live life by than about which rules we should establish that people will ignore if their principles allow.
Showing posts with label Voluntarism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Voluntarism. Show all posts
Wednesday, August 11, 2010
Monday, August 9, 2010
Capitalism, Socialism, and Voluntarism
Capitalism, Socialism, and Voluntarism
by Alex Merced
People blame all the worlds problems on it's systems of resource management, for in the end that is all that Capitalism and Socialism are, systems to managing scarce resources. Quality of life, happiness, joy; these are all things that are not quantifiable, and independent of how resources are managed. Someone in the most tyrannical despotic land can still find joy and happiness cause it's internal and has to do with ones perception of the world around them. So even if we agreed which system of resource management is better, does this mean people will be happy? Probably Not.
If you operate in a system that is objectively seen as "better" by others yet you subjectively see as "corrupt", "tyrannical", "immoral", and many other adjectives; you'll be unhappy since you feel forced to comply with something to which you not consent. This is the overriding issue than that of economics; that of consent. As long as their is a government imposing any system of any type on a entire population there will be despair and unhappiness from those who do not consent to participate. The road to happiness is that of your choosing.
This is the true Anarchist position, whether you call yourself a Anarcho-Capitalist or an Anarcho-Socialist or one of the many of other breeds of anarchist, your still advocating a system. The root of what makes anarchist different is the belief that participation in any of these systems should be voluntary, if everyone consents to play by the rules then any system is arguably workable like any board game is playable with those who are willing to follow the rules. No system can work when imposed on unwilling participants.
Arguably there is a case to be made that multiple communities running different systems that people volunteer in would actually have a positive synergy. If you had one voluntarist community of capitalist they would foster it's citizens competitive and innovative spirits and prices. If there was a neighboring voluntarist socialist community it would offer a place for those who don't want to or can't compete in the competitive capitalist system, yet can still benefit from the innovations of the capitalist society and not mis-manage resources as much cause of the prices set by the capitalist society.
Instead of focusing on which is better and who is right, how about we focus on individual liberty and how voluntarism and liberty leads to beautiful synergy.
by Alex Merced
People blame all the worlds problems on it's systems of resource management, for in the end that is all that Capitalism and Socialism are, systems to managing scarce resources. Quality of life, happiness, joy; these are all things that are not quantifiable, and independent of how resources are managed. Someone in the most tyrannical despotic land can still find joy and happiness cause it's internal and has to do with ones perception of the world around them. So even if we agreed which system of resource management is better, does this mean people will be happy? Probably Not.
If you operate in a system that is objectively seen as "better" by others yet you subjectively see as "corrupt", "tyrannical", "immoral", and many other adjectives; you'll be unhappy since you feel forced to comply with something to which you not consent. This is the overriding issue than that of economics; that of consent. As long as their is a government imposing any system of any type on a entire population there will be despair and unhappiness from those who do not consent to participate. The road to happiness is that of your choosing.
This is the true Anarchist position, whether you call yourself a Anarcho-Capitalist or an Anarcho-Socialist or one of the many of other breeds of anarchist, your still advocating a system. The root of what makes anarchist different is the belief that participation in any of these systems should be voluntary, if everyone consents to play by the rules then any system is arguably workable like any board game is playable with those who are willing to follow the rules. No system can work when imposed on unwilling participants.
Arguably there is a case to be made that multiple communities running different systems that people volunteer in would actually have a positive synergy. If you had one voluntarist community of capitalist they would foster it's citizens competitive and innovative spirits and prices. If there was a neighboring voluntarist socialist community it would offer a place for those who don't want to or can't compete in the competitive capitalist system, yet can still benefit from the innovations of the capitalist society and not mis-manage resources as much cause of the prices set by the capitalist society.
Instead of focusing on which is better and who is right, how about we focus on individual liberty and how voluntarism and liberty leads to beautiful synergy.
Sunday, July 11, 2010
Understanding Social Policy
Understanding Social Policy
by Alex Merced
You may have seen my recent video discussing how people are socialized by institutions, and how all institutions fall into three categories. I then followed up about how this framework can be applied to understanding and combating institutional discrimination. I thought I'd recap much of what I said in a written article for those who prefer these ideas written.
Intersocial Institutions
Definition: These are institutions that are made of people with similar interests, goals, or other unifying interests that are not spiritual. Since these are not spiritual they cannot use to the fear of violence in the afterlife to accept customs, traditions and practices.
Examples: Family, Friends, Clubs, Jobs, etc.
How it enforces Customs: A intersocial institution can only use the fear of being no longer allowed to participate in the institution to keep members in line. These Institutions are voluntary and since they don't threaten violence only removal from the institution, it's the least influential and least destructive to individual liberty of the three types on institutions.
How to Reform: If certains customs or beliefs of the institution are discriminatory or offensive, one can choose to not to participate in these institutions and encourage others to withdraw as well which would destroy these institutions from within. No further coercive method is needed since these insitutions can only survive through voluntarism.
Spiritual Institutions
Definition: These are institutions organized by institutions that exploit the existance or belief in of spirituality.
Examples: Churches, Religons, Youth Groups
How it enforces Customs: A Spiritual Insitution uses FUTURE VIOLENCE as a threat to get participants to participate in it's customs and traditions. The threat that in the afterlife one may live the next life as an inferior being or be casted into eternal damnation are threats of post-life violence. Due to peoples TIME PREFERENCE* this threat of violence is typically less influential than the threat of violence from government.
How to Reform: If certains customs or beliefs of the institution are discriminatory or offensive, one can choose not to participate in these institutions and encourage others to withdraw as well which would destroy these institutions from within. No further coercive method is needed since these insitutions can only survive through voluntarism.
Governmental Institutions
Definition: Tese are insitutions created by a government which is monopoly of violence, and everyone who's governed by this government may or may not consent to be governed, so withdrawl from these institutions is not an option.
Examples: Internal Revenue Service, Department of Education, Federal Drug Administration
How it enforces Customs: A government insitution keeps all people participating through the threat of CURRENT VIOLENCE. If people choose not to obey laws, they are threatened with penalties, incarceration, and inevitably violence to comply. Due to time preference, this CURRENT VIOLENCE is a much stronger influencer than the FUTURE VIOLENCE of the spiritual institutions, on top no one chooses to participate in a governmental institution but are subject to it due to their location or other arbritrary factors
How to Reform: If certains customs or beliefs of the institution are discriminatory or offensive, one can't choose to withdraw so unlike intersocial or spiritual institutions which can be reformed by voluntarist means, a government institution can only be reformed by using the insitutions own power to reform it which means one must climb the power structure and then change the rules. Since this is the only way to reform this institution, it makes it the slowest institution to change and the more influential in keeping discriminatory and collectivist social structure in place for prolonged period of time even after attitudes and values have changed.
Conclusion: While Intersocial and Spiritual institutions both have their roll in discrimintation, violating liberty, and other social problems; they are fairly easy to deal with due to their voluntarist nature. The government on the other hand cannot be dealt with by voluntarist means and is structured in a way that can only serve to keep the status quo in place much longer than it is in the minds of individuals. This is why Libertarians and Anarcho-Capitalist focus so much on abolishing this particular type of institution versus allowing individual to reform the others through voluntarist means.
* Time Preference is a theory developed by Austrian Economist such as Carl Menger and Ludwig Von Mises that states people value present goods over future goods. Alex Merceds views on Sociology/Anthropology are based on an Indivudalist Philosophy (Isaiah Berlin, Murray Rothbard) with an sociological application of Time Preference theory to different threats of Violence.
by Alex Merced
You may have seen my recent video discussing how people are socialized by institutions, and how all institutions fall into three categories. I then followed up about how this framework can be applied to understanding and combating institutional discrimination. I thought I'd recap much of what I said in a written article for those who prefer these ideas written.
Intersocial Institutions
Definition: These are institutions that are made of people with similar interests, goals, or other unifying interests that are not spiritual. Since these are not spiritual they cannot use to the fear of violence in the afterlife to accept customs, traditions and practices.
Examples: Family, Friends, Clubs, Jobs, etc.
How it enforces Customs: A intersocial institution can only use the fear of being no longer allowed to participate in the institution to keep members in line. These Institutions are voluntary and since they don't threaten violence only removal from the institution, it's the least influential and least destructive to individual liberty of the three types on institutions.
How to Reform: If certains customs or beliefs of the institution are discriminatory or offensive, one can choose to not to participate in these institutions and encourage others to withdraw as well which would destroy these institutions from within. No further coercive method is needed since these insitutions can only survive through voluntarism.
Spiritual Institutions
Definition: These are institutions organized by institutions that exploit the existance or belief in of spirituality.
Examples: Churches, Religons, Youth Groups
How it enforces Customs: A Spiritual Insitution uses FUTURE VIOLENCE as a threat to get participants to participate in it's customs and traditions. The threat that in the afterlife one may live the next life as an inferior being or be casted into eternal damnation are threats of post-life violence. Due to peoples TIME PREFERENCE* this threat of violence is typically less influential than the threat of violence from government.
How to Reform: If certains customs or beliefs of the institution are discriminatory or offensive, one can choose not to participate in these institutions and encourage others to withdraw as well which would destroy these institutions from within. No further coercive method is needed since these insitutions can only survive through voluntarism.
Governmental Institutions
Definition: Tese are insitutions created by a government which is monopoly of violence, and everyone who's governed by this government may or may not consent to be governed, so withdrawl from these institutions is not an option.
Examples: Internal Revenue Service, Department of Education, Federal Drug Administration
How it enforces Customs: A government insitution keeps all people participating through the threat of CURRENT VIOLENCE. If people choose not to obey laws, they are threatened with penalties, incarceration, and inevitably violence to comply. Due to time preference, this CURRENT VIOLENCE is a much stronger influencer than the FUTURE VIOLENCE of the spiritual institutions, on top no one chooses to participate in a governmental institution but are subject to it due to their location or other arbritrary factors
How to Reform: If certains customs or beliefs of the institution are discriminatory or offensive, one can't choose to withdraw so unlike intersocial or spiritual institutions which can be reformed by voluntarist means, a government institution can only be reformed by using the insitutions own power to reform it which means one must climb the power structure and then change the rules. Since this is the only way to reform this institution, it makes it the slowest institution to change and the more influential in keeping discriminatory and collectivist social structure in place for prolonged period of time even after attitudes and values have changed.
Conclusion: While Intersocial and Spiritual institutions both have their roll in discrimintation, violating liberty, and other social problems; they are fairly easy to deal with due to their voluntarist nature. The government on the other hand cannot be dealt with by voluntarist means and is structured in a way that can only serve to keep the status quo in place much longer than it is in the minds of individuals. This is why Libertarians and Anarcho-Capitalist focus so much on abolishing this particular type of institution versus allowing individual to reform the others through voluntarist means.
* Time Preference is a theory developed by Austrian Economist such as Carl Menger and Ludwig Von Mises that states people value present goods over future goods. Alex Merceds views on Sociology/Anthropology are based on an Indivudalist Philosophy (Isaiah Berlin, Murray Rothbard) with an sociological application of Time Preference theory to different threats of Violence.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)