Mirkheim,
XXI.
What went wrong in the Polesotechnic League and what will happen next?
Van Rijn:
"'...men who had been free began grabbing for control over other men.'" (p. 286)
Van Rijn and Sandra:
the Seven In Space are crippled and might go under;
the Home Companies are incorporated with the Solar Commonwealth which is "'...starting a big military establishment...'" (p. 285);
the independents are now allied with the Hermetian government.
Van Rijn:
"'No more important private decisions... Instead, authority takes over. Slogans substitute for thinking, beginning with the intellectuals but soon percolating down to the ordinary working man. Politicians appoint themselves magicians, who by passing laws and jacking up taxes and conjuring up money out of thin air can guarantee everybody a soft ride through life. The favored businesses and institutions divide up the territory and strangle out anybody what might have something new.'" (. 286)
He continues:
governments (inevitably?) cause shipwrecks;
the cure is always thought to be more government;
power grows;
domestic troubles are exported as wars.
Some Comments
(i) I do not want a society where the "important private decisions" are taken by members of "'...a free association of entrepreneurs...'" (p. 285)
(ii) Intellectuals think and not just in slogans.
(iii) "'...the ordinary working man...'" might be capable of more than van Rijn realizes - it had to be explained to him that the members of Supermetals were doing something more than playing games with money.
(iv) As long as there is anarchy of production on the one hand and government spending on the other, then governments will continue to raise taxes and to borrow money or to create it by fiat but surely we can find a better way of doing things by now? Banks lend money that is not theirs, lend more than is in their possession and charge interest on it so maybe van Rijn could criticize governments less and banks more?
(v) Do I want "...a soft ride through life..." No. Do I want to have to seek employment in an economy run by "'...a free association of entrepreneurs...'"? No. Scientific knowledge and technology open up far more possibilities than are acknowledged here.
7 comments:
Kaor, Paul!
Your point (i), disagree. It's better for most decisions to be made independently of the gov't.
Your point (ii), again I disagree. MANY so called intellectuals, esp. on the left, do not think, except in slogans. That is what I have personally observed for decades!
Your point (iii) has more validity. Many people in the US are starting to rebel against the disastrous policies of the left. Everything from resisting endless restrictions on their lives in the guise of fighting covid, to dawning awareness that you CAN'T spend your way out of trouble via the nonsense being peddled by "Josip" and his Democrats.
The better way to handle matters is to reduce the powers and scope of activities by the state. To return to a more limited gov't and truly free enterprise economics. These are concrete proposals, not vague exhortations for "something better."
And you need ENTREPRENEURS to discover practical uses for advances in scientific knowledge and technology, btw.
Hapy New Year! Sean
Sean,
Reasoned arguments are summarized in conclusions/"slogans" like "limited government; free enterprise." I know academics (they do not style themselves "intellectuals) who read, think and write a lot. To back up a "slogan," they can point to books and articles.
In a market economy, yes, we need entrepreneurs. Arguments can become circular.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
Then you knew or know some REAL intellectuals. I don't think it's circular to point out what WORKS, and has been shown to work, as opposed to what does not work. The problem is that so many refuse to accept things that work which contradicts their preferred views.
Happy New Year! Sean
Sean,
No. That's not circular. In a market economy, we need entrepreneurs. But how long will we have a market economy? We have previously discussed the technological production of abundance and I know in advance, from past experience, how you will respond to points that I would make so this is another discussion that need not be repeated.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
I understand, we will have to agree to disagree.
Happy New Year! Sean
Banks essentially "issue" currency, by covering only a part of their loans with assets. There's nothing wrong with this, if it isn't overdone; but it does carry risks.
Kaor, Mr. Stirling!
And that is what worries me. I think the US Gov't and US banks have borrowed too much, and with not enough real assets to cover their loans.
With its stunning THIRTY TRILLION dollars in US Gov't national debt, something is going to break, because that kind of debt can't be borne forever.
Ad astra! Sean
Post a Comment