Bastiat, Mises, Rothbard, & Paul

A couple weeks ago or so I received my copies of the “Framework” from the Ludvig von Mises Institute. It consists of four books: The Bastiat Collection, Human Action by Mises; Man, Economy, and State by Rothbard; and Case for Gold by Paul. What excitement to add to my reading a fine collection, about 4,000 pages worth, of excellent writing from proponents of Liberty! Where is my cognac, pipe, and reading chair?

I have been pondering my direction in why I seek to better understand the basis of arguments for liberty especially in the growing horde of collectivist, interventionist, socialist, and ultimately humanist masses. Each of these seem to purport the “greater good” but stems from an ability to substantiate and enforce itself with coercion, deception, and flawed logic. I have no doubt that some if not a majority of proponents of these ideologies have the best intentions. The only system, however, which is truly just, free, and has the greatest potential for equality is one that promotes individuals as the supreme sovereignty to which all other apparati are subservient.

We should note that equality is defined in terms of equal opportunity, not equal stature. Many of today’s so-called liberals and progressives have combined the seemingly self evident value of liberty (à la freedom and justice) with the latter misconception of equality through stature which ultimately leads to coercion. This is the simplest distinction between true “classical” liberals and today’s “liberals” or progressives. The former is true to the idea of individual freedom, the latter is the statist, fascist, communist and any other socialist derivative (and those not of the socialist tradition) thinly veiled under a false guise of freedom.

Why? Because as people have figured out since the beginning of time man is corruptible and imperfect. This is fact, not some religious exposition or moral assertion. To argue otherwise is to ignore realities surrounding the unpredictable nature of probability and reason. Augustine of Hippo wrote of libido dominandi or “the lust to rule” as a powerful driving mechanism for any system of government. How can we possibly believe that any system can we devise which can be executed in truly free, just, and equal (in terms of opportunity to individuals) terms without introducing myriads of varied contradictions? Contrary to popular belief, today’s individual has no less propensity to corruption even under the threat of law than did those people living 2,000 or so years ago. Contrary to popular belief, today’s social, economic, criminal, and civil order has barely changed from the orders existing similarly 2,000 or so years ago. I am completely serious. There are perhaps new methods and explanations for various activity and action but the core of our realities are the same. The proof is in the writings and understandings of the philosophy of those generations compared the activity and action of those living today. Perhaps not identical, but indeed very similar.

These united States enacted a constitution which at the beginning eroded personal sovereignty. What a concept! The state was subservient to the individual. What a truly revolutionary concept this was indeed. However, as I just mentioned, it was flawed from the beginning. The fifth amendment, for example, places the “greater good” above that of the individual with its so-called right to eminent domain. So the question should be posed, was the constitution an instrument of tyranny or a protector of individual freedom at its authoring?

Free market, free religion, free speech, freedom of self defense: these ideas have barely, perhaps for a short sliver of time, been experienced by humanity. Government does not create. It takes and gives (redistributes). It codifies series of cartels and regulations at the agitation of influential interests. Speaking out against the Federal president (or perhaps now essentially dictator [or puppet of banking or industrial-military complex?]) can be prosecuted. In the interest of “equality” we force no expression of religious beliefs and society around us mocks and insults those with Faith with laws which tax (taxation is theft) and pay for things that compromise those indivudals’ beliefs. We are increasingly being bombarded with increasingly draconian arms laws which now even have sponsorship from foreign globalist elitists wishing to force their ideas of order upon everyone. When in time did we truly have Laissez-faire free market capitalism and the freedoms which we naively think we have (or as some believe we tried but discarded because they cannot be trusted to work) or had? What if we had truly private property?

Each of these points and questions I have poised are just that. Meditations and observations I have made. It is easy to be persuaded by the government thought molders at schools and universities, media, propaganda; and as I am surrounded by a majority that seemingly consumes and enjoys the narrow acceptable spectrum in political and historical discourse between Hillary and Mitt I see more if not exclusively issues reduced to things like how much spending rather than none at all, SCOTUS decided that rather than SCOTUS is not infallible; we continue to ignore the rules of economics and reason rather than to understand the ebb and flow of labor and market; we think we can create laws (and yet more laws) and thieve our way into some insane utopian ideal reality for humanity where humanity is reduced to robots and a collective is put upon a pedestal rather than uphold and respect one another as independent, free persons — it is increasingly a dark cloud that over takes this rock floating in the great universe to which few will read between the lines, argue with reason, and understand that the facts, intentions and machinations surrounding our everyday lives are never as they seem.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Bastiat, Mises, Rothbard, & Paul

  1. Crystal says:

    Michael, this is a brilliantly written post and I hope that you don’t mind if I share it? Sadly, I don’t think that many will read, and even fewer will actually question the drivel that is being spoon fed to us under the guise of “equality” and “a better world”. Yet with just a little scratching of the surface of these ideals, we find a wicked and corrupt future, gift-wrapped under the heading of “progressiveness.” It shocks me that anyone striving for these ideals can call themselves a “thinking man” and I am truly troubled by the future that lies before us.

  2. Michael says:

    Of course you can! Thanks for your feedback honey.