Freedom for Bread
August 1, 2008 by Mike Wilson · 9 Comments
One of socialism’s fundamental tenets is its desire for the government to universally care for people, whether it be through single-payor healthcare or ensuring jobs and even equal wealth for all. These are lofty and admirable goals and desires. However, what are the potential costs?
Many conservatives will point to the actual fiscal costs of accomplishing these goals; that it will result in a higher tax burden and therefore a slower economy (because we know it’s all about an “efficient” economy). Others will point to the idea that if the government gets involved in providing everything for everyone, it takes away self-reliance, which is almost a god to be worshiped by many conservatives.
Philosophers and economists from the late 18th century put forth the argument that because the government receives its power from the people, the government can’t do anything that people can’t do. Therefore, because an individual cannot forcibly take money from one person and give it to another, the government should not be able to forcibly tax people and give the money as handouts to others.
Liberals will say, “but taxes aren’t forcibly taking money; we’ve agreed as a society run things this way.” Just try not paying your taxes and see how much force lies therein.
All of these points have some validity, but none of them are strong enough or philosophically fundamental enough to sway me. They don’t address the fundamental problem with government-mediated wealth redistribution or provision for all needs from cradle-to-grave. The fundamental problem has to do with agency and freedom. Let me explain.
Question #6: What is more important–culture, or politics and government?
June 21, 2008 by Stephen Palmer · Leave a Comment
| 10 Foundational Questions | Introduction | Question #1 | Question #2 | Question #3 | Question #4 | Question #5 |
“To put the world right in order, we must first put the nation in order; to put the nation in order, we must first put the family in order; to put the family in order, we must first cultivate our personal life; we must first set our hearts right.” -Confucius
Although this is certainly debatable, it seems clear, when considering the four foundations of freedom, that culture is far more important than politics and government.
What I mean by culture is the social patterns, activities, mores, customs, belief systems, and sense of morality inherent to a society. It’s how the people at large behave in the absence of force. It’s how they view each other and their place in society and how they interact with one another.
In other words, in an aristocratic culture, poor members of society are unlikely to consider that they have the opportunity to attain a higher social status. In social democracies or meritocracies, however, individuals understand that they have the opportunity to be mobile in their social status. (And remember that there is a fundamental difference between a social democracy and a governmental democracy.)
Politics refers to how members of society make group decisions, and government is the institutionalization of force, or the way that political decisions are enforced.
Why It Matters
Although there is some overlap, morality is mainly the purview of culture. So if a nation has a government that stays within its proper realm–to protect unalienable rights–yet voluntary virtue is required to sustain this arrangement, then culture is far more important than its system of government.
By the way, it’s important to define morality, since there’s a tendency to think of morality only in terms of sexual purity. However, by morality I’m referring to a holistic sense of the word, a morality that includes far more than sexuality, including philanthropy, providence (or living up to one’s full potential and doing what they were born to do), personal responsibility, and stewardship.
Another way to explain the preeminence of culture of politics and government is through the principle of voluntarism, which states that the health of a society is equal to what individuals will do voluntarily without the force or assistance of the government.
James Madison explained this concept well in Federalist Paper #51. He wrote, “But what is government itself, but the greatest of all reflections on human nature? If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself. A dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the government; but experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxiliary precautions.”
In other words, he says that the primary way to preserve the society is through virtue in the people, but auxiliary precautions are also necessary, auxiliary precautions being the form of government.
For far too long, we’ve both depended on the government to do things we should be doing as private citizens in the realm of culture, and then blamed them when things go wrong.
It’s time for America to realize that our voluntary culture, or how we act in the absence of government, is far more important than anything the government does, since the government is nothing but a collective reflection of our private lives anyway.
Focus less on changing the government, and focus more on creating a family culture that makes illegitimate government functions unnecessary.
Recommended Reading:
Brave New World by Aldous Huxley
The Giver by Lois Lowry
1984 by George Orwell
Move the Cause of Liberty by (1) subscribing to the Sentinel, a free weekly newsletter boldly illuminating the principles of freedom in a darkening nation, and (2) pledging your Life, Liberty, and Sacred Honor to the Cause by signing the Declaration of Dependence.
Email This Post
Copyright © 2008 by The Cause of Liberty. All rights reserved.
Do economics apply in your life?
January 24, 2008 by Stephen Palmer · Leave a Comment
Does the science of economics have real application in your life, or does it seem like a topic reserved for college professors and “experts?”
The word economics comes from the Greek words oikos (pronounced ee kos) meaning home or house, and nomos, meaning name, organization, or management. To the Greeks, an “oikonomos” is a manager of a home. Economics isn’t about charts, graphs, interest rates, and index funds. It’s about what you do on a daily basis to create a profitable, thriving, and sustainable home life. It’s about learning to create value for your family. An oikonomos is a producer in his or her own home before and above all else.
The science of economics, then, is much closer to home that you may have thought. Be a wise and productive steward of your home and that will be reflected in society. Be the economist in your life.
Move the Cause of Liberty by (1) subscribing to the Sentinel, a free weekly newsletter boldly illuminating the principles of freedom in a darkening nation, and (2) pledging your Life, Liberty, and Sacred Honor to the Cause by signing the Declaration of Dependence.
Email This Post
Copyright © 2008 by The Cause of Liberty. All rights reserved.
-
Free Newsletter Subscription
Subscribe to The Sentinel, a free weekly newsletter boldly illuminating the principles of freedom in a darkening nation, and receive two free gifts. Your personal information will never be shared.
Subscribe To The Cause Of LibertyPolls
Loading ... Loading ... Loading ...