Free Markets & Free Speech [Sunday Linkage]

Aaron Clarey pens another one of his famous posts on economics, wherein he asks the question “Do Market Failures Actually Exist?”

But the problem in having the government “just prevent bad things” is that it is antithetical to a free market.  The nanosecond the government intervenes the market is no longer a market, but a hybrid, that neither operates nor behaves as it normally would if it were completely void of government interference.  Ergo, if the government is constantly intervening, we never get around to finding out if there is such a thing as market failure or that markets can, and will, inevitably heal themselves no matter how severe the “failure.”

The real issue, however, is not whether governments should intervene to prevent “bad things from happening.”  It’s an issue of pain avoidance and speed.

Very much like slowly peeling versus rapidly ripping off the bandaid, most humans are cowards and fear the immense and immediate pain of the rip.  Therefore they prefer “government intervention” in the form of taking the time to gently and meticulously peel the bandaid away.  However, this only delays the inevitable, amortizing the pain over a much longer time period than had you just ripped the bandaid off.  But in either case, the bandaid would have come off and you would have gone out to play as you normally would anyway.

Back when I was young, dumb, and trusting of my elders, I was confused about how things like the Great Depression were even possible. “Even if there’s been a ton of upset over this thing called ‘money’ due to inflation and mal investment,” Aurini(21) asked himself, “isn’t there still demand for food, soap, and Levi’s jeans?  General impoverishment makes sense – I can see the makers of Ivory Back Scratchers going out of business – but the basic necessities of living still need to be grown and assembled, what’s preventing all those unemployed men from working in agriculture and manufacturing?  Shouldn’t it be – if anything – EASIER to find a job during a depression, so long as you’re willing to work for room and board alone?  As opposed to the advanced Ivory Back Scratcher economy where very specific skills are needed?”

Of course, I figured things must be more complex than this, since all my elders were prone to writing esoteric tomes about ‘Macro’ economics, and populating the financial pages with cryptic diagrams and mystical language.

The reality is that I had a better grasp on economics at the age of 21 than Paul Krugman ever will.

‘Market Failures’, at their worst, result in short-term economic disruption and a lowered level of luxury goods – but (if left to their own devices) they also create more low-level jobs, and opportunity for those who embrace mobility.  It takes government manipulation to turn a downturn into a depression; left to their own devices, individuals are far better at solving their own problems than Washington or Wallstreet could ever hope to be.

ͼ-Ѻ-ͽ

So a bunch of creeps at the United Nations are attempting to subvert Freedom of Speech – specifically that of Yours Truly:

So, what sort of content does the UN want to censor?… The UN is hung up on “cyber violence against women,” a Kafkaesque term that is apparently shorthand for “women being criticised on the internet…”

According to feminist culture critic Anita Sarkeesian, who spoke at the event, online “harassment” doesn’t simply consist of what is “legal and illegal,” but “also the day-to-day grind of ‘you’re a liar’ and ‘you suck,’ including all of these hate videos that attack us on a regular basis.”

First, congrats to Aurini, who now officially has his own section in the UN’s “Troublesome-Little-Pricks” file – to the point they are discussing him openly at meetings. I had hoped to beat him to that honor, but alas it was not to be.

That’s right: a bunch of wealthy two-percenters who survive off of public funds and corporate shakedowns are openly plotting about how they can take down a poor, working man for daring to have an informed opinion (don’t worry, AnonCon, I’m sure they’re plotting against you too – they just don’t want to publicly admit that you exist, yet).

A couple of comments:

First, blackmail only works against those who are willing to sell out their integrity for the sake of their desires.  While I’m far from a sinless man, I’d rather have every single secret exposed – I’d rather be pilloried, ridiculed, and have rotten vegetables thrown at me – than knowingly promote falsehoods, and utter modern shibboleths with false conviction.  I’m far from perfect, but Saints aren’t born, they’re made.  I’ll take my integrity over my reputation any day.

Second, it is absolutely vital that you understand the difference between America and the United Nations.  America declares:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

The core of American Freedom is God; the Ineffable; the human soul.  The Bill of Rights is strictly negative in its descriptions, it places fence-posts limiting the government.  No matter what the justification – no matter how strongly the ends justify the means, government is not allowed to do these things, and if it does, it must be abolished by the People.

Now let’s consider the UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights:

Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,

Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people,

Whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law,

Whereas it is essential to promote the development of friendly relations between nations,

Whereas the peoples of the United Nations have in the Charter reaffirmed their faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person and in the equal rights of men and women and have determined to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom,

Whereas Member States have pledged themselves to achieve, in co-operation with the United Nations, the promotion of universal respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms,

Whereas a common understanding of these rights and freedoms is of the greatest importance for the full realization of this pledge,

Now, Therefore THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY proclaims THIS UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS as a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations, to the end that every individual and every organ of society, keeping this Declaration constantly in mind, shall strive by teaching and education to promote respect for these rights and freedoms and by progressive measures, national and international, to secure their universal and effective recognition and observance, both among the peoples of Member States themselves and among the peoples of territories under their jurisdiction.

In other words, the ends justify the means.  The UN defines a method of government (progressivism), and justifies any and all interventions to promote the vague values of ‘Diversity, Solidarity, and Dignity’.  Rather than proscribing limits it prescribes actions.

So long as the causes of ‘friendly relations’, ‘social progress’, and the ‘prevention of armed uprisings’ are achieved, any means are justifiable.  Call it the Corporatization of Governments: it’s more important to keep people obedient and happy than to stand up for the Truth.

God Bless America.