Mises and Madison

"With respect to the two words 'general welfare,' I have always regarded them as qualified by the DETAIL of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a METAMORPHOSIS of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators." -April 20, 1831 Letter from James Madison (dubbed Father of the U.S. Constitution for his role in drafting of the text; see also The Federalist Papers, published on behalf of the American system as one of limited government of by and for the people of A Free Republic)~

"MODERN CRYPTODESPOTISM, which arrogates to itself the name of liberalism, finds fault with the negativity of the concept of freedom. The censure is spurious as it refers merely to the grammatical form of the idea and does not comprehend that all civil rights can be as well defined in affirmative as in negative terms. THEY ARE NEGATIVE AS THEY ARE DESIGNED TO OBVIATE AN EVIL, NAMELY THE OMNIPOTENCE OF THE POLICE POWER [OF GOVERNMENT], AND TO PREVENT THE STATE FROM BECOMING TOTALITARIAN." -Ludwig von Mises in chapter 21, The Theory of Money and Credit~

Prov. 11:3 - If the foundations be destroyed, what shall the righteous do?

Thursday, March 1, 2012

+Save Capitalism, Save America+

In Seven Things I Learned About Transition From Communism, Russian-born Harvard economics professor Andrei Shleifer pointed out that "recovery and rapid growth occured nearly everywhere" after temporary declines as Russia and the Soviet states transitioned -or to use a recently more fashionable term, "transformed" - their economies to more capitalistic ones. And, yes, "economic transformation takes time." Nothing too shattering or surprising really. Read the whole thing if you like. Its just a click away at the hyperlink in the first sentence here.

There are some people who would argue for (and some of them working towards) going in the opposite direction despite its expected ruinous and tyrannical effects on everyone upon who this mad experiment and ideology is imposed.

Transitioning or "transforming" TO Communism away from Capitalism means increased poverty, misery and authoritarianism. This is because, as Adam Smith so astutely emphasized, "the property which every man has in his own labour, as it is the original foundation of all other property, so it is the most sacred and inviolable." 

I'de like to share a quote from Mark Levin's Ameritopia here, to further explain the situation:
As Karl Popper noted, Vladimir "Lenin was quick to realize [that] Marxism was unable to help in practical economics. 'I do not know of any socialist who has dealt with these problems... there was nothing written about such matters in Bolshevik textbooks or in those of the Mensheviks.'
As Lenin admits, 'there is hardly a word on the economics of socialism to be found in Marx's work...'
Man's nature and history are not neatly defined through economic classes, whose members are easily categorized. To say that man exists in essentially one of two economic conditions - a bourgeois or capitalist/landlord class or a proletariat or working class, with the former perpetually exploiting the latter and the latter perpetually exploited by the former - is simply erroneous.
The likelihood of [Communism's] ruling proletariat might break into factions and internal power struggles, with would-be masterminds competing for control over the society; or that once in position to exercise absolute power a dictator or supreme party would voluntarily surrender their power and wither away [when it was theoretically time for the classless utopia to grow out of all this hypothetically brilliant socialism] are not even addressed in the Communist Manifesto. To have done so, however, would have required Marx and Engels to [...] acknowledge the hopelessness of their utopia [...] Notwithstanding one hundred years of communist tyranny and mass genocide, the fanatics cling to their utopia.
See also 

-THE FUTURE OF LIBERTY by George Reisman

No comments:

Post a Comment