FROM time to time, readers urge upon me the espousal of some program they are pleased to call “constructive.” Some say that reform of our monetary system is the one essential for a healthy economic, and therefore social, order; single taxers are convinced that all things evil will vanish with the shifting of the incidence of taxation from production to privilege; for the pacifists, the cure-all is the abolition of war. I have been urged to take up the cudgels for decentralization, while those who see in “world government” the hope for human happiness have tried to press me into their service.
Everyone of the proposed reforms has something to commend it, while the sincerity of the proponents makes one wish that they might succeed. The fact remains, however,
that the reform invariably rests its case on the goodwill, intelligence, and selflessness of men who,invested with the power to do so, will put the reform into operation. And the lesson of history is that power is never so used. Never. I am convinced, on the other hand, that all of the evils of which these honest people complain can be traced
to the misuse of power, and am therefore inclined to dis-trust political power of any kind…. The only “constructive” idea that I can in all conscience advance, then, is that
the individual put his trust in himself, not in power; that he seek to better his understanding and lift his values to a higher and still higher level; that he assume responsibility for his behavior and not shift his responsibility to committees, organizations and, above all, a superpersonal State.Such reforms as are necessary will come of themselves when, or if, men act as intelligent and responsible human beings. There cannot be a “good” society until there are “good” men.
Source link: http://blog.mises.org/9755/something-constructive/
Something Constructive
Previous post: Fantastic essays from The Freeman (pre-Freeman) 1952
{ 8 comments }
I don’t have a clue how to e-mail this blog, so I will use the comment area to point this funny article.
http://www.cracked.com/article_17216_5-most-popular-safety-laws-that-dont-work.html
Always fun to see government fail.
the above sentiment sounds like a calling to all individuals to forget about political & social life in all the countries on our world and let some other higher being (The Bankers, The George Bush Jnr etc) to run societies for us in their interest ..
The above summary suggests the higher motive will always fail, governments/indivduals of good intent should at least try..
Good Luck to Obama, even though some of his policies may not work…
America is lucky, at least Obama can speak & can inspire & his policies are transparent ..
Good lUCK TO HIM.
Mr. Ireland,
With all due respect, you’re a very confused individual. How you could read this passage and claim that the message is for people to forget about “social life”? Social life necessarily means that each individual owns himself and is thus responsible for his own well being. In doing so, he associates (or not) with others on a voluntary basis. This forms the basis for a peaceful and harmonious society.
Contrast that with the political life. Voluntary associations are trumped by pure power. Do as they say, or else. Behind every political act, law or regulation is the barrel of a gun. If you doubt this simple assertion, resist their dictates and find out what happens.
It truly frightens me to think there are people walking the planet that can delude themselves into thinking that a president – a very flawed human being – can rule over 300 million people and not make a complete mess of it all.
Mr Ireland, central planning doesn’t work. It never has and never will. Obama, like those who came before him, will discover this shortly.
So I’m glad to hear that you derive inspiration from the man. When he’s done, that’s all you’ll have left.
” Obama can speak & can inspire & his policies are transparent”
Is this sarcasm?
Seems like Hitler was good at inspiring also…
I’m not sure what you mean by transparent either. Unless ofcoarse your being sarcastic….
Great insight! That’s why we must not fall into the trap (as I have in the past) of advocating “piecemeal reforms” because all it does is leave the state (with rent seeking insiders) directing the “reform”. Look at the “deregulation” of Glass-Steagall, line-item veto, NAFTA, etc.
All it does is shift power of the from one arm of the state to another while making the populace believe it’s more freedom. When the “reform” inevitably fails “freedom” is blamed ie Richman’s Law
I tried that link in a library session (in a Glen Eira library here in Victoria) and got:-
Steve,
I do not mind you calling me confused or not! .
Right now I am trying to figure out where my politics lie in the political spectrum?.
I do think that Chodorov’s statement from what I surmise is, non intervention by Governments !! .
My opinion is Pragmatic interventions by Governments must be made in the USA & worldwide..
Worldwide Captalism & in particular (Financial) needs to be regulated..
Non Intervenation by Politicians is not an option..
The Capitalist/Old Boys Network whether in Wallstreet or here in Dublin needs to be regulated (Bankers renumeration needs capping, Banks do not create wealth unlike manufacturing or services).
Greenspan through loose monetory control, did not create an over leaveraged USA economy but Bankers greed & mediocre leadership did, similarly the same criteria applies to the Celtic Tiger ….
You should look at how the Politicans, Bankers & Property Developers in Ireland connived together to make us, now one of the sick Economies in Europe.
That is way Obama as a centrist is taking on the Interest groups in the USA whether the GM executives or UAW leaders etc..
The USA & world Captailism must be reformed to the betterment of all.
John,
I think it was Chodorov who famously quipped (I’m paraphrasing), “The next guy that calls me a conservative gets a punch in the nose.” But it’s safe to say that he wouldn’t be considered in the modern liberal camp either. I doubt he was an anarchist. In any case, he was appalled at what the government had become during his lifetime. Imagine his reaction to the current state of affairs!
“Pragmatic interventions”? I don’t know of anyone who is averse to pragmatism. The devil is in the details. Your definition of the term is surely different than mine. It is the use of coercion to impose one’s pragmatism that I object to.
“Worldwide Capitalism and in particular (Financial) needs to be regulated”? Care to cite an industry that is more regulated than the financial and banking sectors? Didn’t the SEC give its repeated stamp of approval over Bernie Madoff’s Ponzi scheme? How did that work for his investors? We had the House and Senate oversight committees “protecting” us from Fannie and Freddie mismanagement. Would you deem that successful?
Meanwhile, the Fed is creating mountains of money with no oversight. They aren’t even subject to an audit. If we ought to be regulating anyone, it’s the private banking corporation (sanctioned by the government!) with a monopoly on the supply of money. Better yet, call it a failure and close its doors.
How to stop the conniving you justifiably find distasteful? It won’t be stopped by adding another layer of beaucracy to watch over the other beaucrats. The solution is to not give them the power in the first place. Problem solved!
Comments on this entry are closed.