First, allow me to state what I am for; the maximum amount of voluntary actions possible, with the least amount of coercion possible, with the smallest government possible with the most personal and property rights protected as possible. I hold that peace is better than war, that trade is better than plunder and rational self interest is better than forced servitude.
And now, why.
Anyone who has studied history knows that liberty has been a rare occurrence in the course of human events. There were two notable, but brief and incomplete experiments in freedom in Ancient times; during Greece's golden age (mostly in Athens) and in Rome, but these did not include everyone as there were large slave populations and women, especially in Greece, were not held in high political regard. Despite this, those two societies would accomplish far more than any other contemporary civilization and even exceeding many that came after. But, as civilizations go, as things became too centralized, too dependent upon conquest instead of trade, too dogmatic and too corrupt, Athens and Rome would never recover and succumbed to internal rot and external invasion.
This was an important lesson for me when I began to learn history a little over 20 years ago. I began to wonder why some civilizations flourish and others whither. I wondered, and eventually discovered, why places like Hong Kong were vibrant economies with almost no natural resources and places like the Soviet Union would fail despite vast natural resources. How medieval Baghdad become a center of learning and tolerance, but later become a stagnant and backward slum. Athens and Rome, it turned out, were not aberrations that could not be explained. There were reasons for their success. The United States, once little more than an agrarian society (in which most of the land sat unused), would become an economic, industrial and cultural powerhouse. There was a common thread that ran through all of these; liberty. Art, engineering, entertainment, commerce and even cuisine would all explode when there was liberty, a sense of civic virtue and a rule of law. The record is clear. When it comes to raising the living standard for the average person, nothing works better than a free society. While Sultans, Kings, Emperors and Czars might build grand opera houses or manicured gardens or palatial estates to delight their fellow elites, it is freedom, economic and social, that gives the "little guy" the best possible means to improve his lot in life, and perhaps even to become rich himself. But, when the government tried to control too much or became too bloated and corrupt, collapse was inevitable.
Learning this, libertarianism became clear from a practical sense. But there was more, there was also the moral case for libertarianism.
As I grew older I began to examine the question of rights and morality. I knew that I did not like to be told what to do when I was not harming anyone, so what right did I have to tell others what to do? And if I did not have the right to bark orders arbitrarily, then who did? The State? The voting majority? It did not seem moral to restrict the actions of another, provided the actions were voluntary and did not harm uninvolved parties, but I was not sure, so I asked my teachers. I was told by many that the government needed to "help" guide people in making the "right" decisions, and for a while, I accepted this. After all, drugs were bad right? Smoking kills, doesn't it? I didn't take drugs and I didn't smoke, so why should I care? I was free to do what I wanted after all. But then it occurred to me that while I didn't like drugs or cigarettes, I did like sugary, salty and fatty foods. Suddenly, my interests, my freedoms, were in the cross-hairs of the do-gooders we call the government. The truth then became obvious; if the government had the power to restrict the things I enjoyed under the guise of "protecting" me from myself, then it had the power to do anything. I found this was profoundly immoral because as I understood it, my life was my own to live, for good or bad, it was mine alone. What business was it of anyone's if I wanted to smoke a joint or "read" a pornographic magazine? Left and right wingers both sought to restrict my access to all manner of things, including foreign goods in some cases. On top of that, I would learn that businesses would face expenses imposed by the state, local and federal governments in the form of fees, licenses and taxes with which only large companies could afford to comply. Lawmakers and bureaucrats would pay lip service to "small business owners" and protecting the "rights" of consumers, but it became clear our "benevolent leaders" were liars, hypocrites and fools.
Have you ever been fooled by a magic trick, until you see how it is done and then you feel foolish for having been suckered by such an obvious gag? That is how I felt when I figured out how much government abuses its power. What once seemed like rare and isolated incidents of rogue government agents doing harm to innocent citizens became clearly widespread, systemic and chronic. This was not unique to the United States either. Indeed, many nations were even worse in some respects. Often, the "problems" the government was attempting to fix were not problems at all, and even when there were actual problems to solve, many of the government solutions were worse than the problem they were meant to fix.
Through my journey I would find like minded people who would further illuminate the subject; John Stossel, Milton Friedman, Frédéric Bastiat, and many others.
If indeed my life is my own, then libertarianism is justified to me on both practical and moral grounds.
No comments:
Post a Comment