I Want My Freedom Back
Earlier this week, edweaver submitted a post, "Does a person have to die to be free?" In it, he asked: "Is death the only way to rid yourself of government?" I submitted a response keyed to that question, and the response developed a thread. However, I wanted to submit what I said to the entire Gulch community to see what everyone had to say about it. Here goes:
One realization that has come to me, far slower than it should have, is that it is not enough to be against statism and government, one has to be for something, to have a vision of where one wants to go. The Fountainhead sounds the tocsin against the encroaching state, and Atlas Shrugged painted the dystopian future after that encroaching state has smothered everything in its path. However, Rand never presented a vision of a world in which the things she was fighting for—liberty, limited government, rational self-interest, and capitalism—had triumphed. One of the reasons I wrote The Golden Pinnacle, which you read, Ed, is to, if not show a world where those ideals had triumphed, to at least show what America was like when we approached the pinnacle of freedom during the Industrial Revolution. It is the first of a trilogy, and the third novel will offer the ultimate utopian vision.
You can look at the current nightmare and despair. You ask: “how do ever get the government out of our lives?” Reformulate your question: “how do we restore freedom in America?” It may seem a trivial point, but the first question is akin to: “how do we get the cockroaches out of our kitchen?” It’s a valid question, and the cockroaches have to be eradicated, but it’s mundane and uninspiring. Restoring freedom, on the other hand, inspires, and freedom’s proponents aren’t left just pointing out the deleterious consequences of statism and coercion (even, or especially, for the so-called beneficiaries), but can instead frame the issues in terms of people building better lives for themselves and their families, unobstructed by the state, reaping their just rewards, and rediscovering respect for themselves and their fellow citizens. People need to strive for higher goals than cockroach eradication. (Even that task sounds more palatable if you reformulate it is a part of the job of making your kitchen sparkling clean.)
If we Gulchers frame our goal as restoring freedom, then that can be done in ways large and small. Realize that like all corrupt, overreaching, overextended, overly indebted governments, ours will fail. A big part of our job will be done, but if all we can offer is: “told you so, told you so,” it will not matter. Winston Churchill said, “You can always count on Americans to do the right thing—after they’ve tried everything else.” After the collapse, many Americans will be ready to try the right thing: restoring freedom. The government will be bankrupt and continuation of the welfare state and foreign adventurism will be fiscally impossible. But intellectual revolutions always precede actual revolutions, so it is now that we must make the case not just against current arrangements, but the positive case for restoring freedom, in every way that we can. That’s what leaders do.
Thoughts?
One realization that has come to me, far slower than it should have, is that it is not enough to be against statism and government, one has to be for something, to have a vision of where one wants to go. The Fountainhead sounds the tocsin against the encroaching state, and Atlas Shrugged painted the dystopian future after that encroaching state has smothered everything in its path. However, Rand never presented a vision of a world in which the things she was fighting for—liberty, limited government, rational self-interest, and capitalism—had triumphed. One of the reasons I wrote The Golden Pinnacle, which you read, Ed, is to, if not show a world where those ideals had triumphed, to at least show what America was like when we approached the pinnacle of freedom during the Industrial Revolution. It is the first of a trilogy, and the third novel will offer the ultimate utopian vision.
You can look at the current nightmare and despair. You ask: “how do ever get the government out of our lives?” Reformulate your question: “how do we restore freedom in America?” It may seem a trivial point, but the first question is akin to: “how do we get the cockroaches out of our kitchen?” It’s a valid question, and the cockroaches have to be eradicated, but it’s mundane and uninspiring. Restoring freedom, on the other hand, inspires, and freedom’s proponents aren’t left just pointing out the deleterious consequences of statism and coercion (even, or especially, for the so-called beneficiaries), but can instead frame the issues in terms of people building better lives for themselves and their families, unobstructed by the state, reaping their just rewards, and rediscovering respect for themselves and their fellow citizens. People need to strive for higher goals than cockroach eradication. (Even that task sounds more palatable if you reformulate it is a part of the job of making your kitchen sparkling clean.)
If we Gulchers frame our goal as restoring freedom, then that can be done in ways large and small. Realize that like all corrupt, overreaching, overextended, overly indebted governments, ours will fail. A big part of our job will be done, but if all we can offer is: “told you so, told you so,” it will not matter. Winston Churchill said, “You can always count on Americans to do the right thing—after they’ve tried everything else.” After the collapse, many Americans will be ready to try the right thing: restoring freedom. The government will be bankrupt and continuation of the welfare state and foreign adventurism will be fiscally impossible. But intellectual revolutions always precede actual revolutions, so it is now that we must make the case not just against current arrangements, but the positive case for restoring freedom, in every way that we can. That’s what leaders do.
Thoughts?
I might agree to this much: publish commodity values in terms of one value standard: say the gold troy ounce. But sill allow people to carry receipts for any commodities that anyone is willing to store for others. Nor do I propose that the government involve itself in any of this.
Think of the Mulligan Mint in Atlantis in AS. Mulligan would strike gold or silver coin on request. Now imagine as well that Ellis Wyatt were to issue scrip for the oil he brought out of the ground, or that Midas were to go into the "oil banking" business. All without any government involvement, and with no attempt to fix the value of any commodity in terms of another.
All I'm dealing with here is the concept of Legal Tender. Legal Tender is anything of value that a court might write into its Rules as universally acceptable for the discharge of a private debt, a tax obligation, or a court judgment.
I had in mind letting people carry scrip denominated in certain weights or liquid volumes of commodities the scrip issuer would store in a silo, a tank farm, or other general or specialized warehouse. And to get around the fluctuation issue, I would put the onus on the merchant to offer his goods for sale in any quantity of any commodity he wished. And in this era of smartphones, I'm sure you could soon get an "app" to track commodity-exchange rates, so you could decide for yourself whether any givern merchant was offering you a good deal.
I think you can understand why a purveyor of, say, motor fuel might gladly accept oil scrip at a more favorable rate of exchange than that at which he would accept wood scrip, or paper pulp scrip, or wheat scrip, or even gold or silver coin. Everything would depend on how much effort he would need to get the raw material he needs to produce the goods he provides.
Now of course the merchant has a joker of a problem. His employees could use that wheat scrip to be paid in. And that's just for starters. So any merchant would have a use for any of a number of commodities, not just to make the finished product but also to pay his workers and to support other "ancillary" parts of his operation.
What I'm really callng for is "partial enhanced barter." The enhancement would be that everyone has available to him all the information on how valuable certain commodities can be.
And we bought this line. For thousands of years. Women accepted that we were superior beings, eternal children, raising other children.
So, I am not commenting on the condition of today's world, I am commenting on how deeply people can fool themselves - all the way to the point where the generally savvy folks on this site find no fault in a comment that '[black] slavery' is 'the elephant in the room'. It is not! 50% of the human race brainwashed into non-productiveness for thousands of years is the elephant in the room; slavery pales beside this.
Jan
You must also stand up against those who seek for power - those who want to destroy freedom. And they will come, to be sure.
You must teach that there is black and white. There are actions that lead to freedom and actions that lead to slavery. ALL actions have consequences and all decisions are based on moral principles of action that either maintain or erode the cause of freedom.
If you have any feedback, comments, or ideas, please let me know. I have been interested in this for at least 30+ years. I have spoken to many well versed individuals and have read many authors who have solid economic policy.
Live long, and PROSPER!
Load more comments...