Dear Chris,
Thanks for sharing the short video regarding social democracy, and thank you for asking me to comment on it. I have linked to it at the bottom of this piece.
I will address the video’s points below, but before I do I should probably define a few terms, just so we are clear.
Sovereign – Having exclusive and absolute control over something.
Rights – The sovereignty to act without the permission of others.
I believe that each individual is sovereign; having the absolute power to make decisions about their own life. We own ourselves; we do not own others. Let’s stop there, because many readers already disagree. You see, our conclusions are always based on premises, and this one is my most fundamental. We can continue on, but each reader should decide if they agree with the first premise. What follows builds from here.
Sovereign rights do not mean much to Robinson Crusoe, or to early settlers making their way across barren prairie. They had the same inherent rights to speak freely and practice their religion that we have but they were mainly concerned with finding food and shelter. Rights are inherent; they are part of our individual sovereignty. We have the right to live, but we do not have the right to deprive others of life. We have the right to act in any way we please so long as we do not infringe on the sovereign rights of others, specifically to life, liberty, and property.
We have no right to kill another except in self-defense. We cannot rape or enslave others because to do so violates their sovereign right to liberty. And we cannot steal what they created through their own creativity and labor. To do any of these things is a crime.
Our government exists “to secure these rights” to life, liberty, and property. Government exists as a way to prevent crimes and to provide justice when crimes occur. For this we need laws, and therefore people to make laws, and enforce laws, and to adjudicate disputes and enforce contracts. And so there is justification for lawmakers and judges and police. And because we must decide on laws and elect lawmakers, there is a need for a method to do so. This is the justification for democracy and democratic methods; it is one method for a people to choose of decide things.
Democracy, or majority rule, sounds great, but as we are all aware it has problems. Alexis de Tocqueville pointed out that one of the dangers is the “tyranny of the majority”. The simplest example would be if 51% of the people voted to make a minority group slaves then we would have slavery. Slavery, however, violates the sovereign rights of individuals and so our founders created a Republic, not a Democracy. In a Republic like ours the rights of the individual, including minorities, is protected. These protections are included in our Constitution, which is the same document that acknowledges the sovereignty of the individual and protects their rights.
Democracy is a method that we use, subject to the restrictions of the constitution that is the foundation of our Republic. We use democratic methods, but we are not a Democracy.
All of this refers to our political system, not our economic system. An economic system is the way a people decide to allocate resources to meet the needs and wants of the members of society. Although there are many different ways to devise an economic system, they really boil down to two basic alternatives; either free market competition or central planning. Either way the challenge is the same; what is the best way to distribute the resources and labor available to best meet the needs of the individuals in society?
When you look at the complexity of something as seemingly simple as creating a number 2 pencil, the task becomes daunting. A central planner must understand the proper type of wood and where it is found, what the rubber eraser is made of and where to find it; the lead and the paint and the little metal ring to connect the eraser to the rest. They must then assign the people and resources and decide how many pencils are needed and how many pencils each person will be given.
In a free market economy these decisions are handled efficiently by millions of people making individual decisions and working independently to do what is in their best interest. The pencils get made at the lowest cost and with the proper quality in the correct number because it is in everyone’s best interest for it to be so. No coercion is required; everyone operates independently to produce a product that works for everyone and they do so of their own free will.
As an added bonus, the free market economy is compatible with the sovereign rights of the individual. In a planned economy it is necessary for the central planner to decide things on behalf of the individual; there is no individual sovereignty. Rights must be sacrificed for the good of the central plan.
Now that the stage is set, let’s examine the claims made in the video.
1) Socialist/Socialism versus Social Democracy – Socialism requires central planning. Democracy is a useful tool but is a flawed one. I don’t know or care what the difference is.
2) National parks, libraries, police, and fire are examples of social democracy – Police are a necessary part of government, as described above. The rest would best be provided by free market competition. Public libraries are a great example; the need for them has been drastically altered by the internet but we still have to increase our property taxes to “improve” them.
3) “…Collectively generate revenue…” “…mainly through individual and payroll taxes…” If we are to have government then taxes are necessary. Taxes should be collected to “secure these rights”, but any more than that infringes on the sovereign rights of the individual.
4) “…lost through handouts to large, profitable companies…” Corporate welfare is an abomination. It is immoral and unethical and violates all of our rights. It is wrong.
5) “…students rack up debt, workers struggle…” With choices come consequences. On the other hand, eliminating the dysfunction of corporate welfare will help to bring sanity and integrity back to our economic system.
6) “…Infrastructure crumbles; social security is too expensive…” Roads, bridges, schools, and fire departments are not technically proper functions of government any more than providing for retirement is. But assuming for the moment that they are, they should be funded by states or (better yet) local communities, not the federal government. It is rational for us to come together to provide for common needs, but forcing people to participate violates their individual sovereignty. Why can’t these be toll roads and subscription services?
7) “…Why can’t elected officials put ‘we the people’ first?...” They should put each individual’s rights in front of the demands of the collective mob.
8) ‘…corrupt political system…” Yes, it is. We should eliminate corporate welfare. We should also eliminate the power of elected officials to hand out “goodies” of all kinds. That will end the corruption, as there will not be any incentive left to be corrupt.
9) “…lobbying…tax breaks…” I suggest we eliminate every tax break. Every one. The lobbyists will have no incentive, except the ones who stick around to defend individual liberty.
10) “The result?...the top 0.1%...” Once again, eliminate every bit of corporate welfare and government restriction to competition and the free market will correct its excesses. The TARP and bailout programs, as well as the stimulus only served to reward the 0.1% for their bad behavior. Government needs to let bad behavior be corrected by free markets and stop perpetuating the dysfunction.
12) “Every kid can go to college…” Every individual has an inherent right to act in their own best interest, including the right to contract with another individual to be educated. Sure, in a Republic such as ours with a free market system every individual can choose to go to college and work toward that goal. One current barrier to that goal is government involvement in education, which has raised the price and lowered the quality.
13) “After the Second World War…we rebuilt Europe, put a man on the moon …” Yep. Please take a moment and examine the US national debt. Look at the graph and the curve and trajectory. Even beyond the rights of the individual you should at least understand that if we decide to do things that from a moral perspective we should pay for them, rather than having our grandchildren do so.
There is no such thing as free college. There is such a thing as stealing money from people by force to give to other people. In a free market Republic such theft is a crime. In a Social Democracy such behavior is a necessary function of the central planners. The needs of the individual are secondary to the needs of the collective. The individual, instead of being sovereign, is subordinate to the needs of society. The central planners will necessarily be people of great power, as their decisions will determine the fate of so many. In such an environment corruption is inevitable.
- F.A. Hayek
I realize that all of the above represent a crazy, fringe, minority view. I understand that this is not a view shared by the central planners. I realize the central planners understand better than I do what we all need to do to make a better society.
But I am a sovereign individual. So I could not care less what Bernie Sanders thinks.
Here is a link to the post: https://www.facebook.com/WoodGuard1984/posts/10209633317614247
No comments:
Post a Comment