Confessions of a Dangerous Blogger:

When I was in year 11, I had a friend who was really fond of Socialism. I heard him out and decided that having everyone economically and politically equal was awesome. Being equal is good, I figured, so whatever brings that about is also good. Shortly after, I figured out it wasn’t actually that good at all. It was at that point that I figured out that sacrifices for “noble causes” are often the worst type.

Eventually my opinions would travel full circle, to a laissez-faire approach. In other words, a capitalist one. The very ideals that socialism despised, I began to regard as the best for any country to have. And those ideals stuck. There’s a simple reason for them sticking, and I can explain that in a minute, but first I’d like to talk about why I’m not a “leftie” or as the Americans say, “liberal”.

If I were running for President, I could easily stand up and say “everyone should have free education andhealthcare”. I could also say “we must end racism and injustice, fight for the little man, increase the minimum wage”. These are all statements that I’m sure liberals and lefties would approve of. I would be aware of the benefits that these programs would bring. Who doesn’t want something for free? Everyone would love me. Then I could even say “I will end the power of the corporations over the hard workers of our country. For too long, they have abused their power.” Shit, I’d be a hero of the people. Sure, the rich wouldn’t be too happy, but they have such small numbers that it wouldn’t matter in the end.

I could say all this, but never would. First, because I’ll never be running for President, but second and most important I’d never say this because it wouldn’t work. There’s no doubt that I could increase tax and pay for a number of programs. I could write laws forcing a higher wage and enforce mandatory hiring based on race and sex. The result of this would be equality and free stuff. This is what lefties/liberals see. What I think they miss is the damage these programs do to the very things they aim to protect via the economy.

Now when us capitalists cite the economic reasons for not embarking on socialized programs, we are usually criticized for our lack of heart and compassion and only caring about money. It’s not that we don’t care about people and only care about big business. I personally don’t have a big business of my own, nor do any of my friends. But what I do like about business, all business is how it constantly comes up with cool stuff for me to buy. Most, if not all the stuff that I use in my daily life I owe to business of some kind.That’s why I like them.

The liberal argument againstbusiness is that it doesn’t regulate itself. Completely true. However I’mconstantly disappointed with the Capitalism straw-man that everyone refers to, constructing monopolies, breaking laws and escaping the punishment.Corporate interestslobbying government bodies to make laws in their favorisn’ttrue capitalism.That this happens only points out that the current system is flawed and businesses are just doing what they can to use it’s flaws to their advantages.It wasn’t always flawed this way, or this much, but this is the evil that comes with abiggovernment.

The more reaches the government has into your life, through education,welfare,health, etc, the more chance there is for corporations to manipulate these reaches. I share the left-wing view thatcorporations don’t look out for me, only themselves. But Idon’t think that the government looks out for me either.It’s not just tyranny of the majority, but the fact that those who seek power,often do so for their own gain, notout of genuine love of helping people.Giving others power over your life is not what a free society should head toward, be they governmental or privatecitizens.

Secondly, the free market, if really free, does a far better job than government. People often look to healthcare to point out the flaws in the capitalist system, but healthcare is one of the most heavily regulated industries around. Contrast this to the IT sector which hasand continues to be relatively free from regulation (though this is changing). We see massive changes in the way things are done, the way we interact, the levels of technologyat rates unprecedented in any other industry. You wouldn’t rely on the government to give you a telephone any more(can you remember those days when the government didgive you your phone service and how crap it was?), because now it’s far better and far cheaper than it used to be. So why do you think healthcare or education would be any different if given the chance to be free fromregulation?

If free from regulation, many question the accountability of said institutions. That’s why the market needs to be free,for while corporations won’t regulate themselves, the market will. If a product isn’t good, if a company cheats it’s customers, the market will punish it. If there areregulating laws, then the company could find a way to create a monopoly orfind some government insulation fromharm. However in an open market, customers will simply choose another company that offersa better product or service.In terms of education,why is it that people with money elect to send their kidsto private schools? Whyare these private schools associated with a better education? Because if they weren’t, they’d go out of business.

That is the type of regulation we need, the”invisible hand” that Adam Smith referred to. I think a large part of the belief inso-calledliberal values lies in the mistaking ofstatist capitalism with free-market capitalism.There is a massive difference, and it’s not just a case of one being more extreme than the other. Oneis unfair and allows certain people or corporations toinfluencethe massive powers of government over others. The other only allows people or corporationsto have powerto the extent thattheir product is good and provides value to it’s customers.

Finally, I think that governmental programs, aside from being inefficient and prone to bureaucracy, use theft as their basis. While it sounds nice to rob from the rich to give to the poor, it is still theft dressed up to seem honorable. It’s funny, the majority support programs which allow the governmentforce everyone to be charitable. Why doesn’t the majority just engage in charity of their own free will? Don’t people feel charitable any more? I think they do, though large taxes make it difficult. I read recently that most of US federal income taxes are used to pay off the debt incurred by the FED. If this is true, then why not abolish the FED and everyone can keep 30% more of their income. Won’t everyone feel more generous? Won’t people be inclined to save money or start businesses and create jobs?

I’m afraid that most of the complaints against capitalism arise from the problems that government has created. Look at how the government wars against drugs, which in turn penalizes the poorest communities. Then look at how they blame the status of those minorities caught up in the war on racism permeating through society, those white businessmen who strive to keep them down. In reality, it’s the government which is causing the problems, while pretending to help everyone with their “social programs”.

“But what about the poor, who can’t afford to send their children to school? The rich can get the best schools and stay rich, while the poor will stay poor, unable to afford education and healthcare.” What you have here is the fundamental question, should the government force people to save their money for their children’s education? Or should people take responsibility, save money and invest in their own futures. There are plenty of jobs which don’t require college, and with lower taxes more disposable income to put away for a rainy day. I don’t think it’s at all fair or reasonable for the citizens of a country to cover those who refuse to accept responsibility for themselves. Take away the profitability of the drug trade so that the street price drops to insignificant levels. Give people more free capital to save or enterprise with and you’ll have a more responsible, vibrant populace rather than one which relies on the government to tell them what to do or not do. Just like a child won’t grow up unless they step out from under their parent’s protective wing, so too will citizens be unable to manage their lives whilst the governmental teet still feeds them.

So as a capitalist, I don’t argue against liberalism because I’m heartless or because I don’t want to give people free stuff. We capitalists believe that a better end result won’t be at the expense of one group or the other. We believe that everyone will benefit with more freedom. Because free people are generous and happy.

[EDITORIAL NOTE: After writing this, I realized the I myself might have created a liberal straw-man to attack. If so, please correct me.]

Popularity: 2% [?]

This entry was posted on Friday, July 13th, 2007 at 8:49 PM and is filed under Opinion. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.