Adam Smith, who lived in the eighteenth century, provided the philosophical and most systematic arguments for the underpinnings of a laissez-faire economic system in his book “The Wealth of Nations.” Smith makes the argument that it was only the interference of government which disrupted the natural working of economic society and created poverty and decay rather than abundance and harmony. As Smith explained:

The natural effort of every individual to better his own condition, when suffered to exert itself with freedom and security, is so powerful a principle, that it is alone, and without any assistance, not only capable of carrying on the society to wealth and prosperity, but of surmounting a hundred obstructions with which the folly of human laws too often encumbers its operations.

The drive for greater government regulation is the drive toward increased poverty, unemployment and the loss of liberty. With the Obama administration pushing an ever expanding federal government plan to take control of our financial institutions, health care system, the auto industry, and its attack on free speech, the time is now to clearly articulate the differences between free markets and free people, and government administered markets and government control of our lives.

For Freedom’s Sake

Thomas Sowell
Rose and Milton Friedman Senior Fellow on Public Policy

“Dangers to a society may be mortal without being immediate. One such danger is the prevailing social vision of our time – and the dogmatism with which the ideas, assumptions, and attitudes behind that vision are held.”

Those two poignant sentences were published over 14 years ago in, “The Vision of the Anointed,” written by Thomas Sowell. As I read these words tonight, I felt the weight of their meaning as we watch a political party, which holds power both in the congress and the presidency, begin a systematic attack on the voices of opposition to their drive to remake America. This attack, on free speech and opposing political views, is wrong regardless of which political party holds power, which is why it is a Constitutionally protected right.

Now the holders of power, “the anointed,” as described by Sowell, are moving to swiftly silence those who would oppose their “vision” of a new America. The dangers inherent in shutting down the political process and debate is real and “mortal.” Sowell describes the reality of these dangers as they have played out in history when he writes:

It is not that these views are especially evil or especially erroneous. Human beings have been making mistakes and committing sins as long as there have been human beings. The great catastrophes of history have usually involved much more than that. Typically, there has been an additional and crucial ingredient – some method by which feedback from reality has been prevented, so that a dangerous course of action could be blindly continued to at fatal conclusion. Much of the continent of Europe was devastated in World War II because the totalitarian regime of the Nazis did not permit those who foresaw the self-destructive consequences of Hitler’s policies to alter, or even to influence, those policies. In earlier eras as well, many individuals foresaw the self-destruction of their own civilizations, from the days of the Roman Empire to the eras of the Spanish, Ottoman, and other empires. Yet that alone was not enough to change the course that was leading to ruin. Today, despite free speech, and the mass media, the prevailing social vision is dangerously close to sealing itself off from any discordant feedback from reality. [Emphasis Added]

I am more aware of the uncertainty of the prospects for human liberty that I thought I could ever imagine. Blogging, on these matters, is not a form of entertainment or something to fill my free-time. No, the urgency of our cause, to protect human liberty, is an obligation for those of us who have benefited from the spilt blood and sacrifices of our Founders. BTW, please watch the John Adams (HBO Miniseries) DVD if you want to see just how much these great men and women sacrificed. We must all do our part and we must all labor together For Freedom’s Sake.

It appears that we are witnessing, not only an all out assault on the greatest free-market system in the world, but the re-engineering of American society. The statements made by, then candidate, Barack Obama, that this economic recovery will be from the bottom-up, and the, “don’t you believe in spreading the wealth around,” were insights into what we are now seeing played out in congress as a thrust of socialists policies being rammed down the throats of all Americans. The “we won” attitude and the “your getting what you deserve” mentality, is political hubris at its worst.

Frederic Bastiat, in his monumental work, “The Law” makes the case, that once we go down the path of using the law to violate liberty and private property, in the name of equality, there is no stopping it. He asks the question, “Once started, where will you stop? And where will the law stop itself””

Please think about the truth of the statements that Bastiat makes below. Share them with your friends and apply these insights to your evaluation of your government. Bastiat writes:

The mission of the law is not to oppress persons and plunder them of their property….Its mission is to protect persons and property.

Furthermore, it must not be said that the law may be philanthropic if, in the process, it refrains from oppressing persons and plundering them of their property; this would be a contradiction. The law cannot avoid having an effect upon persons and property; and if the law acts in any manner except to protect them, its actions then necessarily violate the liberty of persons and their right to own property.

The law is justice—simple and clear, precise and bounded. Every eye can see it, and every mind can grasp it; for justice is measurable, immutable, and unchangeable. Justice is neither more than this nor less than this.

If you exceed this proper limit—if you attempt to make the law religious, fraternal, equalizing, philanthropic, industrial, literary, or artistic—you will then be lost in an uncharted territory, in vagueness and uncertainty, in a forced utopia or, even worse, in a multitude of utopias, each striving to seize the law and impose it upon you. This is true because fraternity and philanthropy, unlike justice, do not have precise limits. Once started, where will you stop? And where will the law stop itself?

The speed at which the current administration and congress is moving creates a barrier to the appropriate dialog necessary to ensure competent public policy decisions. This, I believe, is by design. We must keep thinking through what we are hearing and give thoughtful responses to our government officials. Me must slow this “train” down.