From Fascism to Socialism in a Bloodless Coup
The only redeeming feature of our political process is that we peacefully accomplished an ideological shift -- a coup of sorts -- that in almost every other instance led to blood in the streets. Of course, the shift is mere window dressing as both McCain and Obama stand for big government, big wars, and big deficits. The only difference between their respective agendas being which group of Americans loses through wealth redistribution and which Third World country watches their women and children suffer and die due to our foreign policy.
Actually, it is ironic. In just about every other country, in just about every other time, the only way an evil, crazed radical took the reigns of power was through bloodshed and intrigue. Not here, though. We did it to ourselves in the reflexive ritual we call democracy. I'm certain that Gramsci is cheering from his Italian grave.
Say good night to the family, the church, and every other institution that made this nation great so many years ago. Our epitaph is: We did it to ourselves.
Good night!
On the local scene: It appears that most local tax levies passed in my area. Amazingly, while the private sector is contracting, the public sector is growing. It seems that Michelle Obama is right: in order to serve your community, you must work for government. Too bad for those of us who remain in the private sector -- stooped in our rice fields, weighed down by the yoke of taxation. Again, we did it to ourselves.
Note: My sadness would have been the same had the election gone the other way. My bright spot is the opportunity to introduce new folks to Liberty. What else will we have to talk about in the two-hour soup line?
Bookmark/Share
|
Comments (66)
Comments (66)
jon
just because violence hasn't started yet doesn't mean it won't.
Published: November 4, 2008 10:54 PM
Nasikabatrachus
"Say good night to the family, the church, and every other institution that made this nation great so many years ago."
I'm curious as to what you mean by this, Fedako. What's special about this election? Did the US have more families and churches than other countries?
"just because violence hasn't started yet doesn't mean it won't."
The violence goes on day by day. Every time someone gets attacked by blue costumed thugs for smoking a vegetable, every time someone can't use their property, their earnings, or their body the way they see fit. The real change will be from dishonest to honest violence--"You owe me your money" vs. "Your wallet or your life".
Published: November 4, 2008 11:25 PM
J. Chris Folsom
On the local scene: It appears that most local tax levies passed in my area.
Yep, plus issue 6 was voted down and issue 5 passed. I'd say it's an all-around triumph for totalitarianism.
just because violence hasn't started yet doesn't mean it won't.
I'll be dealing violently with anyone standing between me and the first plane, boat, or donkey out of the country.
Too bad for those of us who remain in the private sector -- stooped in our rice fields, weighed down by the yoke of taxation.
It would seem like the quickest path to freedom would be for everyone to become a state employee. Then, the Nazi weasels would have no one left to leech off and the engine of oppression would collapse. I'm joining the police force tomorrow, I just hope that when judgement day comes, my reason for doing so will be understood. I'd hate to burn in hell with the rest of those assholes.
Anyway...Here's something to cheer you up:
http://filmgordon.files.wordpress.com/2008/03/barackrollingstone.jpg
Published: November 4, 2008 11:41 PM
J. Chris Folsom
I wasn't going to post this, but then I figured that Obama truth squads were already on their way to grab me and put me in a FEMA camp anyway.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZxfDEdG0qBs
I won't stop writing, but if i don't post again, expect a 21st century gulag archipelago to be released posthumously.
Published: November 4, 2008 11:52 PM
Frank Gas
Statist parties discredited. 1 down, 1 to go.
Published: November 4, 2008 11:55 PM
Steve Hogan
You're using the royal "we," Jim. You and I didn't choose this course. It was chosen for us. We, unfortunately, have to live with the outcome. And while it true that we will be materially poorer in the months and years ahead, there is nothing preventing us from remaining true to family, friends, and community.
More accurately, it will become necessary to teach those around us about fundamental economic and political truths. Among them, that soft socialism, like fascism and corporatism, is not moral or feasible without violating individual rights. No election can erase that fact.
The key question: will enough of us realize these basic truths before it's too late to reclaim what is rightfully ours?
Published: November 5, 2008 12:00 AM
J. Chris Folsom
Statist parties discredited. 1 down, 1 to go.
Unfortunately, I think the mass psychosis may be a lot deeper in Obama's supporters. Cognitive therapy will likely be less effective on them as well, since cognitive therapy requires cognition.
Published: November 5, 2008 12:16 AM
Inquisitor
Steve, it's a play on the mentality that under democracy, "we" really do it all to "ourselves". I'm sure you got that though... just pointing it out anyway.
Published: November 5, 2008 12:22 AM
James R
Despite how the media will try to spin it, this wasn't a mandate for the Democrats; this was a mandate against the Republicans. The American public handed the reigns to the Democrats because the vast majority of them saw no other option.
This is where we have our work cut out for us.
No Presidential candidate ever delivers on even a fraction of his campaign promises. Obama will be no different. The irrational, emotional exuberance the American public feels for him will sour quickly once he fails to to get the economy "back on track".
When that happens, we have to be there. The American public needs to know that they have a choice between bankrupting our country by nation-building and bankrupting it by sweeping social entitlements. We need to explain what sound money is. We need to explain what the inflation tax is. We need to explain what fractional reserve banking is. We need to point people to mises.org.
I encourage all mises.org readers to sign up with the Campaign for Liberty and get involved.
Published: November 5, 2008 1:50 AM
Marie
James, right on. It is our job as citizens who understands economics to educate. We cannot give up. Our own public school system are producing gimme, gimme, gimme future adults. We cannot allow to let Obama and his fans create massive entitlement programs.
Published: November 5, 2008 3:08 AM
Brent
When isn't the state using or threatening violence?
Published: November 5, 2008 4:21 AM
Haas
View it from my perspective- i come back from studying for my exams and I see my family all at home celebrating Obama's victory...we live in NEW ZEALAND!!!!! it is a sad sight to watch people all over the world let their emotions take over and come together to worship one man.
At least the republicans have learned and will learn a lesson not to give up on the ideals that made them who they were- or at least pretending they were free market capitalists and advocates for smaller government.
This is another failed experiment that the US and the world will have to go through- when the soviets fell because of socialism it was because the US was the good guy and the soviets were the bad guys...now when the US crashes down due to socialism hopefully it will be a lesson for us all to remember forever...just can't wait till this psychotic celebrations calm down...starting to get on my nerves :)
Published: November 5, 2008 6:24 AM
DS
The leap from Fascism to Communism is indeed a very short one.
Published: November 5, 2008 6:30 AM
Michael Smith
So now we have a new looter-in-chief. Let's look at the good news. This particular looter does not pretend to be pro-capitalism while he destroys the last remnants of capitalism or a friend of free markets even as he works furiously to eliminate them; he doesn't claim to be in favor of deregulation while signing off on whatever new regulations the overtly statist Democrats come up with. He’s on record as favoring a “spreading of the wealth”.
So the discrediting of capitalism will dissipate. It won't disappear overnight because the coming recession -- make that depression if Obama actually succeeds in passing everything he wants -- will be blamed on those evil capitalistic Republicans who deregulated Wall Street. (Yes, it’s a preposterous claim, but that’s how the media will depict it for at least the time being.) Eventually, however, the failures of Obamunism will become more and more difficult to disguise.
Let us be thankful that at least we no longer have to put up with putative capitalists in office who do far more damage to capitalism than its overt enemies have ever done.
Published: November 5, 2008 6:38 AM
Southwood
I am as much for freedom as you seem to be, and while i am glad that we have at last seen a (vaguely) black face in the white house, i think i am as disillusioned as you are with US democracy.
However i think your faith in "the family and the church" is entirely misplaced. While i support the freedom of anyone to have a family or visit a church, and obviously support anyone's freedom of religion, you must realise the evils that centuries of focus on the church and "the family" have brought upon the country.
Published: November 5, 2008 6:39 AM
Kurmudjin
It will take more than cognitve therapy. It will take intensive deprogramming from the cult. I doubt we have the resources or intestinal fortitude to tackle deprogramming Big Brother's followers.
Nasikabatrachus,
Love the moniker! Wikipedia:
Perhaps we shall all need to emulate the Pignose Frog for the next 4 years... Not so sure about surviving on termites, though.
Published: November 5, 2008 6:55 AM
Harold L.
The most positively disgusting thing about this election, to me, is not which party was put into power, because both parties are too corrupt for words, and only marginally different from one another.
For me, it's the picture of it that I just can't stand: thousands upon thousands of people bawling, cheering, and worshiping (yes, worshiping) this one man. It's the belief that electing this one man, and giving him all but free rein to do what he wants, can be a good thing. It's the faith in government (i.e., in force) that just kills me.
I'm reminded of Mencken's quote, that every decent man is ashamed of the government he lives under. We should all be ashamed of the masses who worship and weep for a man who promises them only violence and poverty.
It is not we who have done it to ourselves. They have done it to us, and continue to do it to us, and have sworn to kick it up a notch.
Published: November 5, 2008 7:55 AM
Dan
I too agree that we should be at the ready to educate people. I was talking with someone about the crisis and started talking about our Federal Reserve system and fractional reserve banking and it was a mild "take the red pill" moment for him. It took maybe ten minutes (if that) to start seeing that he was getting it. Now we're e-mailing each other and I'm sending him pertinent articles from mises.org and other freedom loving sites.
Comment from Haas:
View it from my perspective- i come back from studying for my exams and I see my family all at home celebrating Obama's victory...we live in NEW ZEALAND!!!!! it is a sad sight to watch people all over the world let their emotions take over and come together to worship one man.
Hey Haas,
How's it down there in NZ? My family and I were looking at NZ as a place to live. Now it looks like I may have to wait and see about the "freedom movement" here in the US before flying the coup so to speak.
Cheers
Published: November 5, 2008 8:07 AM
fundamentalist
The problem runs much deeper than just one election. Very few people can live without someone or something greater than themselves to worship. Even atheists often worship mankind (Nietzsche) or nature. Most of the Americans who have abandoned traditional Christianity, the majority, have set up the state as their idol and the president as their High Priest. They look to the president as savior, healer, provider, warrior, defender, mother, father, and judge. Of course, that is totally irrational, which means that reason alone will not change anyone’s mind. There is nothing to do but wait for the inevitable consequences and hope that people will listen to the truth then.
Published: November 5, 2008 8:23 AM
fundamentalist
On a brighter side, there is a lot of money to be made in an inflationary environment. With the guidance of the ABCT, freedom-loving people should be able to become quite wealthy. While in the wilderness (or the Diaspora), we should concentrate on using Austrian economics to make money and keep it away from the state as much as possible.
Published: November 5, 2008 8:30 AM
Jeffrey Tucker
Jim Fedako seems down in the dumps after the Obama victory, and it is easy to see why. If you think of this as a positive endorsement of his Keynesian-socialist economic ideas, it looks like a terrible failure for classical liberals.
However, there is another way to look at it: a complete repudiation of the Bush regime of endless wars, welfare, bailouts, attacks on core liberties, and also (and this is important) the incredible arrogance of the Bush regime's assumption that it could forever rule by lie and be utterly disregarding of the ever rising public hated of him and his administration.
The worst aspect of a McCain victory would have been undeniable: it would have been seen as a ratification of Bush-style government, not only here but around the world. And despite the last-minute attacks on Obama's socialism etc., McCain is even worse than Bush on nearly every issue of foreign and domestic policy.
Bush is one of the most hated presidents in American history, and rightly so. How does an electorate deal with that? Voting against the candidate who is most like him is one way.
Published: November 5, 2008 8:34 AM
Michael A. Clem
The trouble with this election is that this is just a swing of the pendulum. Give the Democrats a few years to make a mess of things, and the voters will put Republicans back in charge, never having learned that the problem is their never-ending faith in government and politicians to fix their problems for them, and failing to recognize just how much of their problems are actually caused by the government and these same politicians.
Only once they recognize that the problem is the system, not who's in charge, will we see any significant and meaningful change in the political process.
Published: November 5, 2008 9:23 AM
J. Chris Folsom
I'm reminded of Mencken's quote, that every decent man is ashamed of the government he lives under
Always been my favorite Menckenism. Indeed the term 'anarchist' is just a fancy way of saying 'decent human being.' Unfortunately however, we do not live in a nation of decent human beings. We live in a nation populated by 300 million raving psychotics with anti-social personality disorders.
If you are approaching people with the assumption that they are logical, coherent, and empathetic, you are going to be continually confused. You will sit around and stew wondering how someone could be evil enough to vote in the first place and why they can't see the most obvious and simple truths. You will inevidably conclude that they must be stupid, since you fail to realize that it was you who made the error by subconsciously accepting a priori the misguided belief that they are sane.
You have the wrong map for the territory, and when you have the wrong map for the territory, it is no wonder that you end up lost and confused.
What planet earth needs is mass-therapy as a countermeasure to the mass-psychosis. Everyone who is capable should be studying the techniques of REBT/CBT, social psychology and engaging in curing these monkeys at every possible opportunity. Everyone should be reading the semanticists (especially Korzybski) and refining and expanding techniques to treat schizophrenia. "Science and Sanity" is required reading.
How does an electorate deal with that? Voting against the candidate who is most like him is one way.
And they will be ready to vote again for someone who isn't Obama when they get sick of him.
This sort of fascist reactionary behavior was designed into the system from the beginning. The two-party system is inherently sado-masochistic in nature. As a mechanism of control, it works marvelously at controlling perverse and primitive primate personalities. Like the authoritarian hierarchy, it allows for the expression of both forms of second-circuit[1] pathology: the desire to be subjected and the desire to subject others. That is its genius and why it has been so successful at constructing this empire of evil.
If you are waiting for an election to solve your problems, you are going to be waiting indefinitely. Political solutions are pointless unless you deal with the underlying etiology. Without dealing with the real issue, any efforts amount to little more than the application of bandaids and the pointless spinning of wheels.
[1] See Leary 8-circuit model.
Published: November 5, 2008 9:48 AM
Jim Fedako
Jeffrey,
Thanks for painting a bright spot on an otherwise gray morning.
I do hope that you are correct. But I fear that the majority of both parties has grown to accept government as their rich, doting uncle – the uncle who occasionally sends a gift in the form of an incentive check.
That said, I agree that many voted their disapproval of Bush, but the electoral landslide provides the cover of a mandate for the radicals. And, I believe, the election cycle and vote radicalized a significant segment of the hitherto nonpolitical folks.
Note: My use of “we” is purely in a poetic or rhetorical sense.
Published: November 5, 2008 10:27 AM
Glen
For years now, capitalism has been strong enough to keep afloat despite the chains government keeps putting on it. We have been subject to the 'business cycle' and there is no good evidence that the government has run out of bubbles that it can create. Do not be surprised if Obama meets some 'success'. Also, government has its media and corporate lackeys (or is government their lackey?) to convince most people that any success is due to Obama's 'wonderful policies' or spin even spin failures to seem successes. Unfortunately, as fundamentalist points out, this is a lie that most people wish to believe.
If Obama fails? His lackeys will spin the lie that it was capitalism that was behind the failure. Maybe he just doesn't have enough power. At worst, was a victim of the agency problem. People will tend to believe that lie. If enough people refuse to believe this Demipub lie, the Republicrats will come back into power by spinning the lie that their welfare queens were hurt by Obama's policy. I have no faith in man, especially one whose power come from a gun, to ever do the right thing.
Published: November 5, 2008 10:55 AM
David Spellman
I hear it often said that people are voting for the lesser of two evils. We are also saying that we need to get the message of liberty out because we believe that if people just saw the light they would embrace freedom.
I think that is naive and mistaken. The people alternate between the two parties not in search of something better, but in frustration because the siren's song keeps leading them to destruction. People really do want the empty promises and vain programs to make purses from sow's ears.
The last thing people want to accept is that they will have to work hard to get ahead in life. As long as there is a demagogue promising to give them their neighbor's goods, they will vote him into office.
True change can only arise from the ruins of the current system. As long as the system is even limping along, it will be allowed to live.
Published: November 5, 2008 11:15 AM
Ohhh Henry
Here is a typical example of the opinions of the voting public - culled from a non-political website on which a discussion of the election cropped up:
"I'm hoping that with Obama as president we can become a country that has universal health care, universal IDs, and a generally stronger federal government while restoring the rights of the people that have been abridged by the Bush administration."
Need I say more?
Published: November 5, 2008 11:26 AM
Paulo
Please, don't drink and write.
Published: November 5, 2008 11:45 AM
J. Chris Folsom
become a country that has universal health care, universal IDs, and a generally stronger federal government while restoring the rights of the people
This lunacy is pandemic and a perfect example of the type of general disorder to which I was referring.
A stronger federal government that is both pro 'universal health care' and pro human rights is self-contradictory and can only occur within the mind of a schizophrenic.
Sane Response:
Supporting 'universal health care' is predicated upon the support of universal slavery and completely incompatible with human rights.
Sane Solution:
Understand that what you are dealing with is mental illness and respond accordingly.
Published: November 5, 2008 11:45 AM
Sean
Wow, I need to visit this place more often. Nice posts.
I agree with all that it's the system that is broken, and not the leader in charge. After watching Bush for eight years abandon all hope of fiscal restraint, I reluctantly came to accept this as fact. However, we face an obstacle that I fear is too great to over come. The uneducated masses. For every person who posts here, there are 500,000 more in society who don't have the most basic understanding about the free market, democracy, tax structure, etc. Not only are they uneducated, they are aggressively uneductaed thwarting all attempts to understand these most basic concepts. We have tens of millions of people, literally, who are COMPLETELY DEPENDENT upon the crumbs that will be thrown to them from Uncle Sam. They believe there is an endless supply of wealth in the hands of a few people which can be tapped unceasingly without consequence. There is a basic belief that those who are wealthy some how are evil, undeserving, and merely luckier than those "less fortunate". How do you over come this? They mingle and share the smae beliefs only soldifying their resolve that they are right.
I truly believe this is the beginning of the end of the greatness our country once had. Our core belief in hard work leading to prosperity has been replaced by one of sloth, and being given something that was taken from another.
Published: November 5, 2008 12:04 PM
Brian Gladish
James,
Don't forget that 80 years after the fact Hoover is hated for not having done enough, and FDR is perceived as the saint that saved us from the Great Depression. Obama may have the capacity to go down as another FDR, even if he fails miserably. I can only hope I'm wrong.
Published: November 5, 2008 12:20 PM
J. Chris Folsom
How do you over come this?
The only non-violent solution is mass-therapy.
It is absolutely critical to understand that the anti-capitalist mentality and fascist rage are the direct result of sexual impotence.
As sure as all destructive behavior is the result of sexual impotence, all creative acts are the results of a healthy normal function.
One simple thing that could make these sociopaths a little less diabolical would be to legalize prostitution, since it would provide an outlet for their frustration other than the voting booth.
If you truly want to understand your neighbors, I recommend starting with the following books (in order):
Prometheus Rising
The Anti-Capitalist Mentality
The Mass Psychology of Fascism
People in Trouble
The Function of the Orgasm
The Murder of Christ
Listen, Little Man
Escape From Freedom
Obedience to Authority
The Origins of Totalitarianism
Saharasia
A Tale of Two Cities
Illuminatus
Schroedingers Cat
Drive Yourself Sane
Science and Sanity
Once you have an understanding of the problem, move on to solutions which is another reading list entirely.
Published: November 5, 2008 12:23 PM
David Walker
Fedako,
Where have you been? "We" have toiled toward big government for a long time now.
There are a number of pivotal events and years that brought us to this place: 1990 is definitely a milestone year, wherein Congress granted the US EPA the right to make new rules without consent of the Congress, i.e., the people. It provoked many trade policies and agreements that have been sucking all the real wealth out of the country ever since.
As long as the masses can continue to vote themselves a raise, there will be no reason to reduce the size of government and restore the Constitution to its rightful place in our hearts and minds.
Published: November 5, 2008 12:41 PM
curio
"I too agree that we should be at the ready to educate people. I was talking with someone about the crisis and started talking about our Federal Reserve system and fractional reserve banking and it was a mild "take the red pill" moment for him. It took maybe ten minutes (if that) to start seeing that he was getting it. Now we're e-mailing each other and I'm sending him pertinent articles from mises.org and other freedom loving sites."
Indeed. I am a professional with an MBA and had never been exposed to Austrian economics until an individual on another message board pointed me to this site. I had a very intense, long debate with him and in the end could not argue with his logic. I could not understand why I had never heard this side of the story - I was so saturated with propaganda touting the existing system that I was blind.
I am a highly motivated, well-read person with a high degree of interest in economics. It took over 30 years and post-graduate school to wake me up (although arguably the grad school slowed me down). Now imagine persuading less ambitious people with little interest in economics, which is likely the majority of people in the US.
Part of my effort has been to go on "common" message boards such as msn and stir things up with messages such as fractional reserve banking, the Fed as communism (central planning), sources of inflation, the gold standard, etc. It is hard to gauge results, but I am convinced that many got the message and even more at least became aware that such things exist.
The trick is to come off very rational and cool-headed, as people are prone to instantly regard you as a nut-job initially. Provide various links to credible sources, not just to this site.
The message must be sent out to the masses, and this is a critical time to do it, while people are receptive to the problems currently exposed in our existing system. The time-frame is short, people's memories fade quickly once the next big headline comes out.
Published: November 5, 2008 1:05 PM
Christopher Lewis
I believe Thomas Hobbes put it best:
"In a Democracy, the whole Assembly cannot fail, unless the multitude that are to be governed fail."
Published: November 5, 2008 1:37 PM
Walt D.
Jeff
While what you say about GW is true, the reason for the landslide was the economic crisis. We all know that this was caused by the Fed. The Democrats in Congress an the SEC, Chris Dodd, Barney Frank, and Chris Dodd all deserve an assist. Bad as GW was, he was only peripherally involved, up to the Wall Street Welfare package. Even so, I think it would be unfair to saddle the Democrats with all the blame.
Although there was unprecendted disapproval for the Congress, the same clueless morons were re-elected. Now we can look forward to a mega-dose of new Keynesian "borrow and spend programs" with a view to stimulating the economy.
IMHO we were doomed regardless of whether Obama or McCain elected.
Published: November 5, 2008 1:48 PM
Sean
Wow, I need to visit this place more often. Nice posts.
I agree with all that it's the system that is broken, and not the leader in charge. After watching Bush for eight years abandon all hope of fiscal restraint, I reluctantly came to accept this as fact. However, we face an obstacle that I fear is too great to over come. The uneducated masses. For every person who posts here, there are 500,000 more in society who don't have the most basic understanding about the free market, democracy, tax structure, etc. Not only are they uneducated, they are aggressively uneductaed thwarting all attempts to understand these most basic concepts. We have tens of millions of people, literally, who are COMPLETELY DEPENDENT upon the crumbs that will be thrown to them from Uncle Sam. They believe there is an endless supply of wealth in the hands of a few people which can be tapped unceasingly without consequence. There is a basic belief that those who are wealthy some how are evil, undeserving, and merely luckier than those "less fortunate". How do you over come this? They mingle and share the smae beliefs only soldifying their resolve that they are right.
I truly believe this is the beginning of the end of the greatness our country once had. Our core belief in hard work leading to prosperity has been replaced by one of sloth, and being given something that was taken from another.
Published: November 5, 2008 1:52 PM
Book 'em Danno
Is it better to have no knowledge of economics or have confidence in the wrong economics?
I often argue with Ivy League grad students and always make a classic-liberal/Austrian case. I tend to receive condescending and dismissive responses.
During a recent Facebook debate I said simply that FDR's policies exacerbated the Depression. One poli-sci doctoral candidate snapped in reply "FDR a fascist? He got money into the pockets of those who did not have any. What are you, anyway? Some kind of ALIEN?! .... Besides, I don't consider libertarian opinion."
Published: November 5, 2008 1:53 PM
J. Chris Folsom
between Calvin and Hobbes, I always thought that Calvin had a better grasp of the essence of democracy:
"The part I think I'd like best is crushing people who get in my way."
Published: November 5, 2008 1:53 PM
Franklin
"As long as the masses can continue to vote themselves a raise...."
True, David, but the essence is more psychologically subtle. The masses are voting in self interest. The masses who voted yesterday were not just government employees. Witness spending/intrusion on all levels: Fed, State, Local. The government has grown since our Framers' "invented it." And, Cato economists, please spare me references to Reaganomics and deficits as a percent of GDP... Cripe, more Republican apologizing. Under Ronnie, the government grew, period. Just as it did under those before him, and those who came after.
In the local communities, you might witness some ebb and flow, per capita, but that is also related to the level of "assistance" the State or Feds are providing to the municipalities during any given year. Government, in toto, continues to grow, continues to "regulate" and intrude.
Voters WANT the government to protect them, even at the local level, and in many ways -- "keep those zoning regulations because I have a 'right' to see my property increase in value without worrying that my neighbor might start servicing automobiles in his garage." Government largess isn't just via a rebate program.
The voters championed more government yesterday. Just as they, ultimately, always have. On another post, I wrote of the Massachusetts ballot question regarding elimination of the State income tax. The state won, by nearly a 70-30 margin. Imagine?!! Most folks want the State to do whatever the hell it does, except, well, just do it more, uhhh, "efficiently."
Only when folks see government as intruding (not helping) can the tide be turned back. And if they aren't seeing it intruding now, when will they?
Don't give up the fight, but even if Obama "fails", and then a Repub steps in with the words, "smaller government," just look at the the trend over the past century or two.
Regards,
F.
Published: November 5, 2008 1:58 PM
Douglas Ghizzoni
Curio brings up a good point about how even as an educated and rational being he was sucked into hoax.
I think politics should be viewed as a religion. People usually believe what their family and their community taught them, they missionary themselves to convince others that they are right and the others are wrong, they follow the sermons of their saintly or deified leaders (for republicans it's Reagan, dems it was Clinton and now Obama), and they blame other things for why their side/beliefs fail.
I think when people come to a conclusion or belief, they do everything they can to only reinforce their belief. Example, a democrat may refuse to hear an opposition's point of view even when the other side's logic trumps theirs. The counter attacks rarely make any sense and have no rational connection, yet are accepted as true. I.e. "You're against universal health care? Then clearly you must want the poor to die."
I also feel that a lot of this has to do with the natural tendency of many people to want to blame outside sources for their faults. If people choose to learn about personal finance, learned how to budget and save and invest, and accepted the personal responsibility of insuring their own future, how many of them would be asking for social security? Fiscal responsibility is a personal task, not the government. I especially don't understand how the young support social security when 45 years from now when there is no guarantee that the system will exist to assist them and their poor spending habits (okay, we know it won't exist).
Something around 80% of New Yorkers has excessive debt not including their mortgage. The average debt an American has is around $16,000. People have less than 2% of their earning saved. The government gets blamed, as it should, but personal responsibility is never brought up. "But things cost too much!" Well that's because of excessive spending on top of the inflation. I'd love for someone to show how bad spending habits (fake demand increase) have inflated prices over the standard rate of inflation.
It's about personal responsibility; each person's responsibility to understand economics, finance, politics and the world around them. Until more people are willing to accept responsibility, they'll cling to their ideology like any religious zealot.
Published: November 5, 2008 2:06 PM
Curt Howland
Curio, "I could not understand why I had never heard this side of the story - I was so saturated with propaganda touting the existing system that I was blind."
The reaction I usually get when I get into such a discussion on a board or mailing list, is to have my "opponent" tell me that what I have to say is completely invalid, because I'm relying on the naive and deliberately ignorant reactionaries on LewRockwell.com and Mises.org.
Really.
"You wouldn't know anyting of reality, since the fools on [Mises or LRC] are all you ever read. Get your head out of the sand!"
... and that was on a homeschooling list. So much for the excellence of homeschooling being a universal trait.
Published: November 5, 2008 2:06 PM
Douglas Ghizzoni
@Curt
Such is the way with blind faith. Refuse to acknowledge anything that might shake your beliefs to the core. Reframe reality so that it bends to your viewpoint because heaven forbide we ever see and deal with the thing that is right in front of our faces.
Hmm, Folsom, I think you're onto something about the collective schizophrenia. :)
Published: November 5, 2008 2:20 PM
Brutus
I read Frank Chodorov's Fugutive Essays over the weekend and he believes that socialists are born and not made. Some people have an innate belief that if given enough power they can make the world a better place through forcing other to be like them. They name such oppression "humanitarianism" and it sells to the masses. Even if you steep these people in classical liberal thought or Austrian economics or natural rights, they would find such ideas inherently distasteful because freedom is not in their nature.
This is what I see in both Obama and McCain and many Americans such as the example Book'em Danno shared. Frankly, I don't know how we can reverse this trend, but I have taken Chodorov's and Nock's advice to work on the one person whom I can change: me. My self-education has paid dividends in that I am better able to articulate Austrian economics when I do get into discussions about the financial situation and I can also discuss the State, its origins, and its nature. I'm still learning and my book list is huge. I'm working my way through Crisis and Leviathan; Man, Economy, and State; and recently ordered Human Action.
Thanks to the Mises Institute and LewRockwell.com, I have been able to educate myself and even point others to the sites so that they may educate themselves.
Tu ne cede malis!
Published: November 5, 2008 2:27 PM
fundamentalist
Book 'em Danno : "I tend to receive condescending and dismissive responses."
It's sad, but socialists think insults are an acceptable substitute for reasoning.
Published: November 5, 2008 3:13 PM
Enjoy Every Sandwich
@Curt,
"The reaction I usually get when I get into such a discussion on a board or mailing list, is to have my "opponent" tell me that what I have to say is completely invalid, because I'm relying on the naive and deliberately ignorant reactionaries on LewRockwell.com and Mises.org."
Yeah, that happens to me too. I usually don't help matters by pointing out that their argument is a logical fallacy. I suppose that there is a better way to answer but I'm not sure what that would be.
Published: November 5, 2008 3:55 PM
fundamentalist
Brutus: "...he believes that socialists are born and not made."
I think socialism comes from the idea that people are born pure and perfect. People naturally abhore the evil in the world and want to know why some people resort to evil. They conclude that society makes them bad by oppressing them in some way. Socialists believe capitalism makes people bad because wealth isn't evenly distributed. If a capitalist society can make people bad, then a socialist society can make them good. That was Marx's whole point. He believed that once we got rid of property and created a socialist society, the natural goodness of mankind would surface and we would live in a perfect world without crime or poverty.
When capitalism was at its peak in the West, most people followed the traditional Christian principle that mankind is born with a tendency toward evil (original sin) and must be socialized, otherwise society degenerates into chaos. In other words, they believed that the way children were socialized determined the character of society. They believed that you produce a great society by producing civilized children, but they never believed you could perfect people. Socialists turned that on its head and said that children are perfect; society is the problem.
This fundamental belief that mankind is redeemable and perfectable simply by changing society to a socialist one drives socialists.
Published: November 5, 2008 5:06 PM
P.M.Lawrence
"In just about every other country, in just about every other time, the only way a evil, crazed radical took the reigns of power was through bloodshed and intrigue".
There's the obvious exception of Hitler. He actually tried that method and failed. Then he went the democratic route, intrigued within that to get power - and, after that, used violence (the Reichstag fire, the internal purge of the Night of the Long Knives) to consolidate power.
But he isn't the only exception. There were also Napoleon I and III, the Paraguayan dynasty that culminated in Francisco Solano Lopez, and maybe Batista in Cuba. They all used intrigue within "legitimate" structures (thus, "legitimately") on the way to power, and violence afterwards. There were probably others that don't spring to mind.
Published: November 5, 2008 6:18 PM
curio
"The reaction I usually get when I get into such a discussion on a board or mailing list, is to have my "opponent" tell me that what I have to say is completely invalid, because I'm relying on the naive and deliberately ignorant reactionaries on LewRockwell.com and Mises.org."
I've found that starting slowly and discussing systems usually works better, eventually easing into the writings of visionaries. If you start with the visionaries, people instinctively have "wacko" alarms going off.
But if you start by explaining a system, like fractional reserve banking, there is less to argue with. Same with Fed creation and true role of the Fed. I've found that people are much more receptive to that style of debate.
For example telling people that the Fed, that overseer of the "financial market capital of the world", is a central bank, and a central bank equates to central planning, and central planning is essentially communism, really grabs one's attention. Everyone understands how communism turned out, and once they realize that the head of our so-called "market system" is controlled in the same way as communism, eyes and ears start to open. Once you have begun to persuade them with facts that they can verify for themselves, then you can move into broader territory such as the great thinkers.
Coming from my own personal experience, when your long-held belief systems are dramatically challenged, you must be eased into it. Going straight to academic findings usually has little effect. The argument must be presented logically and verifiable from multiple credible sources, rather than saying "look at what this amazing guy wrote". Have them google "fractional reserve banking" or "federal reserve creation". Positing that "the Fed is an unconstitutional abomination" automatically turns people off and makes them defensive. Let them discover facts for themselves, and if they aren't getting it (most don't for a while, it takes great tolerance) gently steer them to the critiques of those systems and the facts that are often overlooked or understated.
Sometimes, rather than providing sources of your own, have them provide their sources of knowledge on these subjects and use that to your advantage. Like a history book, often the facts are there, it's just that the important facts get little attention or are downplayed. Exploit that.
Published: November 5, 2008 6:40 PM
Bruce Koerber
November 5, 2008
The Welfare/Warfare State Shifts Its Weight!
The behemoth does not move fast. Now its one leg is numb so it is time to shift some of its gross obesity to the other leg. It is just a matter of time before the ever-growing and massive burden will numb that leg too and so back and forth, shifting from one leg to the other, the restless miscreant we call the State must “change.”
This is the “change” we are hearing about. It is the change from a fascist/socialism mentality that drives the warfare State to a socialist/fascist mentality that drives the welfare State.
Both efforts are attempts to generate prosperity by the means of interventionism. Both attempts depend on counterfeiting, theft, politically-motivated redistribution of wealth, debt, inflation, and the camouflaging of bankruptcy.
Because of the worldwide monetary hegemony afforded to the United States since the dollar was designated as the reserve currency for the worldwide collusion of central banks, the day of reckoning was pushed into the future just like Keynes said “We’re all dead in the long run.” But when that future arrives we are then all alive when the Keynesian long run crashes upon the scene! Which means: there is no way to camouflage the bankruptcy.
Shifting weight from the warfare leg to the welfare leg will do nothing to prevent the equilibrium forces from lowering the boom. The ego-driven interventionists and their political rhetoric will not be able to keep the equilibrium forces and the weight of the State from breaking the bones, shattering them right before our eyes.
Will chaos then reign? Not if enough people know about the principles of classical liberalism and Austrian economics.
Published: November 5, 2008 9:11 PM
Holden
As cynical and pessismistic as this sounds I must disagree on somethings. The "bashing" of democracy is kind of ignorant in itself because first America does not have a democratic form of government, its more of a republic.
"Say good night to the family, the church, and every other institution that made this nation great so many years ago. Our epitaph is: We did it to ourselves."
-How by electing either canidate or we in a sense "sending ourselves to an early grave?" If anything I believe this election has involved more families to bring up political issues in their housholds and as much as seperation of church and state is illegal, its in the church too. By involving ourselves and we only strength these institutions, the family and the church.
Published: November 5, 2008 9:11 PM
Friends Of Liberty
I've been called many names because I am a Libertarian and an advocate of capitalism and the free market. I must vote for Hillary, I was told. If not, then I am a sexist for not wanting a woman as President. I must vote for Obama, I was told. If not, then I am a racist for not wanting a black man as President. I should vote for McCain, I was told, because he's a Maverick! (a lone dissenter, as an intellectual, an artist, or a politician, who takes an independent stand apart from his or her associates--dictionary.com) And the looloo of them all: Oh, that Sarah Palin is so right for the VP position. Look how pretty she is!
Truth be told, I would be a racist if I voted for a man based on the color of his skin. I would be a sexist if I voted for someone based on their gender. I would be an idiot if I voted for someone because they were pretty (Sarah Palin), handsome (Bill Clinton) or goofy-looking (Ross Perot). And what qualifies McCain for the title of "Maverick"? Has he dissented from the fascist, warmongering, statism and collectivism of his party, and turned to the Jeffersonian, Constitutionalist, laissez-faire capitalist and free-market principles of Libertarianism and Austrian Economics? I think not. Ron Paul is certainly a Maverick, without being a gung-ho, rootin'-tootin', pistol-shootin', word-flubbin', big-eared dummy like Dubya.
I'm so tired of politics, and election time B.S., negative ads, propaganda, and empty promises filled with magic trigger words, such as: "America!", "Change!", "Patriotic!", "Freedom!", etc; words that are designed to rouse the unthinking populace into patriotic frenzy. My emotions change from disgust to melancholy at the thought of living in Oceania, and being at constant war with, and always having been at war with Eurasia, or was it Eastasia? I forget.
Published: November 5, 2008 9:55 PM
Haas
"Hey Haas,
How's it down there in NZ? My family and I were looking at NZ as a place to live. Now it looks like I may have to wait and see about the "freedom movement" here in the US before flying the coup so to speak."
Hey Dan- well we are still freer than you guys in many respects and our socialist government will be replaced with semi conservative government after 9 pocket draining years- since we lost all jobs and businesses to our less taxing neighbors Australia (we hate them) it seems like in NZ we are also ready for a change but towards less taxation - while the ozzies just elected a socialist so we are hoping for a wave of privatization to sweep this country in the next 3 years we will see how it goes...we seem to be moving towards the US in increasing the size of government in many respects though. Come for a visit I am sure you will like it- at least for the amazing scenery and safety relative to US standards
Published: November 6, 2008 5:56 AM
Bruce Graeme
The only possible solution to the present crisis will require the abolition of the welfare state.
We have only three alternatives:
-1 Abolish the welfare state now while the economy, and a prosperous future, can still be salvaged.
-2 Allow the welfare state to live on until the ever increasing rate of inflation, which is its essential by-product, inevitably creates an economic collapse back into the pre-existent state of poverty.
-3 Impose total economic socialism, with the enslavement of the minds of the persons of ability for the sake of the lumpenproletariat, and accept a condition of perpetual stagnation at a subsistence level of minimal economic self-assertion due to the inherent nonviability of socialism as an economic system.
Contrary to the claims of its proponents the "mixed economy" or welfare state is not a viable, independent economic system midway between private capitalism and state capitalism, but merely represents a transitional stage from the former to the latter, by the route of economic collapse and the sacrifice of the future and of those who represent it.
Published: November 6, 2008 6:29 AM
Dan
I have to agree with curio on starting with fractional reserve banking as an educational ice breaker. Most people I have talked to about it don't react politically to it because it flies under the radar. Then moving on to the Fed and the characters who set it up can be the next level of the rabbit hole.
Hey Haas,
Do you have another blog site where we can PM? Would like to contact you and get your input if we take a trip to NZ in March or April of '09.
Published: November 6, 2008 7:32 AM
mark branham
NO!!!!!!!!!!!
NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Sheeesssh, you people continue to amaze me. How can so many bright and thoughtful and concerned people get it so consistently wrong.
Again and again and again and again.
Central banks guarantee fiat money. Central banks guarantee socialism when fiat money no longer provides the same level of benefit. Capitalism and your so-called "free markets" are neither when they're in the hands of fiat money and those fallible humans who live in constant FEAR of not having enough.
If you think growth is good, then your a capitalist. If you think growth is good then your not a realist. We live on a finite planet where limits cannot be abridged. We capitalist humans will try, but when we bump up against these limits we'll blame everything but the cause. The blind have always led the blind.
You want to educate the people? You want to be there when the Obama promise stumbles? That's not clear thinking. Good luck trying to educate the mob, especially a cold, hungry, angry expectant mob, who just want things "back to normal."
The solution is to not dig the hole. Once the hole is dug, there is no way out. Game over.
Published: November 6, 2008 7:32 AM
Misesean
"You wouldn't know anyting of reality, since the fools on [Mises or LRC] are all you ever read. Get your head out of the sand!"
Snap! I got exactly that just yesterday :)
BTW, if anyone wants to help out discussing with non-libertarians in these threads on the "right" to health care and how bad socialism is, I could do with some support.
Published: November 6, 2008 8:03 AM
The Goodnight Kiwi
Hey Dan- well we are still freer than you guys in many respects and our socialist government will be replaced with semi conservative government after 9 pocket draining years
You think John-boy's Labour-lite are "semi-conservative"?
we are hoping for a wave of privatization to sweep this country in the next 3 years
I see no evidence of more than about 7 people in the country hoping for that, Teflon Helen still has a lot of support, the Fitz-simple-simons Party could get more votes than the rest of the third parties put together, and there are still people who'll vote for that blowhard from Tauranga...but the Nats are no better. Ugh. I'll be sitting this one out.
Published: November 6, 2008 8:22 AM
J. Chris Folsom
Capitalism and your so-called "free markets" are neither when they're in the hands of fiat money
Nonsense. If you have fiat money, then it isn't a free market.
If you think growth is good then your not a realist. We live on a finite planet where limits cannot be abridged.
Peak oil is a myth brother. There's no shortage of anything anywhere except where the state has interfered. Furthermore, capitalism, unlike socialism encourages frugality in the consumption of natural resources, since the property is in the hands of each individual rather than the state.
Good luck trying to educate the mob, especially a cold, hungry, angry expectant mob, who just want things "back to normal."
Well if you believe that people cannot be cured then you're only left with two alternatives:
1. Give up all hope of ever living in a free world
2. Kill them all.
So if we buy into your defeatist attitude, then the only conclusion we can come to is that it is over for the entire human race.
The solution is to not dig the hole. Once the hole is dug, there is no way out.
There are plenty ways out of any hole. You just aren't thinking creatively enough. Impossible means that it just hasn't been done yet.
Published: November 6, 2008 9:22 AM
J. Chris Folsom
If you think growth is good then your not a realist. We live on a finite planet where limits cannot be abridged.
Forgot to add one point Mark. By definition, productivity gains mean that you are producing more with the same factors of production.
Therefore:
Growth means that you are consuming less resources in production, not more.
Your head is inside out.
Published: November 6, 2008 9:32 AM
parsimonia
" Capitalism and your so-called "free markets" are neither when they're in the hands of fiat money and those fallible humans who live in constant FEAR of not having enough."
I'll ignore the rest of the rant because this is the part that most interests me. How is it that Obama garnered so much support by pandering to people who are convinced they are living in near poverty when all the statistics demonstrate that even those on fixed incomes are reaping the rewards of the most recent long-term yet artificial boom? Although it can't have affected that many people yet, the mortgage meltdown may well have cost the Republicans the election.
Obama gained the advantage by convincing relatively well-off people that they were in dire straits and managing to use the Republicans' reputation as being the party of big business to lay the blame on the supposed free market system.
(Otherwise, what are you saying, Mark, that we should start a new government elsewhere or seek offshore banking opportunities????)
Published: November 6, 2008 11:47 AM
Kevin Carson
The equation of "socialism" to the degree of state control of the economy is an ahistorical invention of Mises.
"Socialism" was originally understood to mean the actual control of economic and political power--including the production process--by the working class. Even the most statist of state socialists, like Friedrich Engels, considered state ownership and planning to be secondary to the possession of real power by the working class. Even Engels and the other state socialists considered the kind of Bismarckian mixed economy which came to predominate under the European social democracies and American New Deal to be essentially capitalist, because the state was controlled by corporate capital. It was an example of the corporate capitalists acting through the state, their executive committee, to stabilize state capitalism by subsidizing certain of its operating costs and restricting competition from those (in George Carlin's words) outside the "big fucking club."
Considering that Obama's main economic adviser comes from Citigroup and Goldman-Sachs, his chief of staff is Rahm Emanuel, and Nancy Pelosi's husband is an investment banker, they're a pretty unlikely gang of "socialists."
Published: November 6, 2008 1:34 PM
J. Chris Folsom
The equation of "socialism" to the degree of state control of the economy is an ahistorical invention of Mises.
Nonsense. Socialism and Statism are synonymous terms.
"Socialism" was originally understood to mean the actual control of economic and political power--including the production process--by the working class.
Yes, through the redistribution of property stolen from its rightful owners.
All acts of robbery are acts of government, regardless of what additional trappings of statism the criminals choose to embrace. Government is a monopoly on crime for a particular location in space and time. A single individual robbing a store is still an act of government even if the robber doesn't receive a medal for his actions and isn't wearing a uniform.
It was an example of the corporate capitalists acting through the state, their executive committee, to stabilize state capitalism by subsidizing certain of its operating costs and restricting competition from those
Sorry, but are you cracked? Capitalism and the state are antithetical concepts. The type of system that you are describing is exactly the type of system that the U.S. has today.
It's called National Socialism (a.k.a. Nazism) and was invented as an intermediary measure (by Fabians) to bring about a global communist state.
Considering that Obama's main economic adviser comes from Citigroup and Goldman-Sachs, his chief of staff is Rahm Emanuel, and Nancy Pelosi's husband is an investment banker, they're a pretty unlikely gang of "socialists."
This shows a general ignorance on the nature and origins of socialism. Socialism and Communism are and always have been movements of the rich. They are only sold as movements of the working class, to dupe the mooing masses into providing the requisite force to accomplish the agenda.
Recommended Reading:
Gary Allen None Dare call it a conspiracy
Published: November 6, 2008 2:02 PM
fundamentalist
Kevin: "The equation of "socialism" to the degree of state control of the economy is an ahistorical invention of Mises."
That's a pretty serious charge. I have read a lot of Mises's works and haven't come across anything that he invented. More likely that he got he got it right and that you just want to distort history to serve your own ideology.
Kevin: "Even Engels and the other state socialists considered the kind of Bismarckian mixed economy which came to predominate under the European social democracies and American New Deal to be essentially capitalist, because the state was controlled by corporate capital."
I think that would have surprised Bismarck, Hitler and Mussolini. My reading of socialist history leads me to believe that distinguishing between corporations and small business, then defining capitalism as large corporations only is a very recent development in socialist thought, post WWII.
Socialism wasn't a monolith even in the 19th century. There were different strains. The Germans decided to go with state control of business while the Russians decided upon state ownership. But they were both socialist.
Published: November 6, 2008 4:51 PM
Haas
Hey Dan no I only comment on this blog- email me if you want though- kakahass@gmail.com- although I won't be around for the next few months will be going on holiday and family weddings overseas- etc etc.
Goodholiday kiwi you should have given your vote for act they are the only party that speak of 'some' libertarian principles- sitting at home doing nothing won't change anything- yes i know john isn't a true conservative but we work with what we have hopefully we will repeal ACC and interest free student loans to begin with- although it might all be a dream...who knows i'm hoping Act push the nats to the right a bit. ANYTHING is better than Labour...we were basically a communist state!
Published: November 8, 2008 6:42 AM
Derek Wall
'Growth means that you are consuming less resources in production, not more.'
well no if we use less resources we have less growth, growth is not always a good measure of efficiency...however if I see rising gnp and less use of oil may be I will give you more credence
ah well I have learnt that bankers are socialists from this discussion...
Published: December 30, 2008 4:22 PM