“[W]hat was the matter with the doctrine of laissez-faire was not that it believed that liberty could preserve equality, where there was none to preserve. It was that it preached liberty, or rather license, to increase an inequality that was already hopelessly unequal.”
G.K. Chesterton
Recently Glenn Beck interviewed John Stossel -- libertarian and recently-retired ABC broadcaster -- on the occasion of his newly released book, No They Can’t: Why Government Fails and Individuals Succeed -
(Here's a link to the interview: http://www.glennbeck.com/2012/04/11/john-stossel-%E2%80%9Cmarket-discipline-is-the-only-real-protection%E2%80%9D/)
To begin, half of all populations have double digit intelligence.
Therefore, those individuals who "succeed" in the sense Stossel and Beck have in mind, enjoy triple digit intelligence with which to prey upon the 155,000,000 Americans whose IQ is 99 or lower.
Liberatarianism is a political philosophy based on a simple set of Impossibly Pure Principles.
Limited to simple "addition and subtraction," the allure of these principles is like a free whorehouse to soldiers on leave.
The guiding principle is this: "Let everything be just as it is in nature, and prosperity will be maximized."
It is beyond question that those who are best suited for "natural survival" will do extraordinarily well in an unregulated "jungle" where "the fittest" exploit markets without impediment.
But before long the success of "the fittest" becomes competition among the fittest to determine who will emerge as The One Alpha Dog, or - if you will - The One Inca.
In every full economic cycle typified by regulation-deregulation-re-regulation, the prevalent "animal spirits" of the initial "free for all" give way to a very limited group of Robber Barons who sequester so much resource unto themselves that lower classes no longer have enough purchasing power to propel the consumption on which growth depends. (
Currently 31,000 Americans enjoy an unprecedented 6% of national income - and a far larger percentage of national treasure. (
Remarkably, The Great Recession did not result in downward, distributive pressure on wealth. Instead, the nation's banks further consolidated following the collapse of 2008.
The Rich -- fabulously wealthy beyond anyone's pre-War imagination -- are getting even richer and there numbers are growing fewer as people fall from "the ruling class" into the middle class and as the middle class gets whacked beyond recognition. (“In 1985, the top five percent of the households – the wealthiest five percent – had net worth of $8 trillion – which is a lot. Today, after serial bubble after serial bubble, the top five per cent have net worth of $40 trillion. The top five percent have gained more wealth than the whole human race had created prior to 1980.” Ronald Reagan Budget Director, David Stockman, who oversaw the largest tax cut in human history.)
In the absence of regulation, it is incontrovertibly true that an increasingly smaller number of "successful" rich people generate fabulous wealth - right up to the point where their unwillingness to "share" and refusal to regulate result in self-destruction.
British philosopher G.K. Chesterton - widely considered a "conservative") has a firm grip on the short hairs: "We have remarked that one reason offered for being a progressive is that things naturally tend to grow better. But the only real reason for being a progressive is that things naturally tend to grow worse. The corruption in things is not only the best argument for being progressive; it is also the only argument against being conservative. The conservative theory would really be quite sweeping and unanswerable if it were not for this one fact. But all conservatism is based upon the idea that if you leave things alone you leave them as they are. But you do not. If you leave a thing alone you leave it to a torrent of change. If you leave a white post alone it will soon be a black post. If you particularly want it to be white you must be always painting it again; that is, you must be always having a revolution [I would say reformation; revolutions tend to pull up or burn the fences RK]. Briefly, if you want the old white post you must have a new white post." (A.A. I marvel that so many "Christians" -- ever eager to encourage the development of virtue through discipline and self-abnegation -- abjectly surrender to the blandishments of "Do Nothing Utopianism.")
Chesterton also adumbrates John Kenneth Galbraith's observation that "The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness." Says Chesterton: “An enormous amount of modern ingenuity is expended on finding defenses for the indefensible conduct of the powerful.”
So, if you are clever and your aspiration is to "get rich quick" (or, more accurately, "to make a killing") you are juicy-ripe for Libertarianism and the Roulette Bet that your ducks will align.
But if your conscience believes that government intervention -- admittedly a cumbersome, inefficient mechanism -- is the only way to prevent the devastation that The Clever Rich perpetrate on The Dull and Poor, then you will see need to participate in The Murk of The Real World, forswearing the demonic glamor of Impossibly Pure Principles which begin their Reign of Terror by "cutting people out," proceed by "cutting people down" and conclude by "cutting their own jowly throats."
For those whose compassionate realism leads them into The Human Murk, there is no expectation that things will ever be perfect.
They won't.
The Puerility of Perfection belongs to infants, libertarians (and, increasingly, "Republicans").
In the end, many Americans who believe that self-interest trumps The Common Good will undertake the risks of libertarianism -- even the suicidalness of libertarianism -- because they limn another of Chesterton's truths: "Only poor men get hanged."
And only poor men starve.
An Italian proverb reminds us: "A full belly does not believe in hunger."
And so, the most obese society in history struggles to devise an intravenous solution that will mainline pure fat.
“The merely rich are not rich enough to rule the modern market. The things that change modern history, the big national and international loans, the big educational and philanthropic foundations, the purchase of numberless newspapers, the big prices paid for peerages, the big expenses often incurred in elections - these are getting too big for everybody except the misers; the men with the largest of earthly fortunes and the smallest of earthly aims. There are two other odd and rather important things to be said about them. The first is this: that with this aristocracy we do not have the chance of a lucky variety in types which belongs to larger and looser aristocracies. The moderately rich include all kinds of people even good people. Even priests are sometimes saints; and even soldiers are sometimes heroes. Some doctors have really grown wealthy by curing their patients and not by flattering them; some brewers have been known to sell beer. But among the Very Rich you will never find a really generous man, even by accident. They may give their money away, but they will never give themselves away; they are egoistic, secretive, dry as old bones. To be smart enough to get all that money you must be dull enough to want it.” G. K. Chesterton
No comments:
Post a Comment