This short essay is in many ways an expression of the thoughts that ran through my mind, as I saw many who claimed themselves “advocates of freedom” utilize the rhetoric thereof to coerce the public to their own profit. This rhetoric is obviously nothing more than the hopes of people, who wish to sacrifice the lives of many for temporary market gains.
Before I begin, I would greatly appreciate your subscription to this newsletter. I do my best to keep all these writings as free and as accessible as possible. If you find some value in my writing, I would also appreciate your support by becoming a Patron.
Thanks, and… I hope you enjoy.
Image by Bhakti Iyata from Pixabay
I look to you Hayek, defender of Liberty and markets as we encounter a force external to human society. One that cares not about our perceptions of individualism, let alone collectivism, but merely that it reproduces and survives. Through this ferocious enemy, we are tested globally. We find ourselves and our liberties attacked— not by the wishes of a state— but by an invisible foe.
In this, many of us find ourselves absent from the market solutions you sought to best be capable of solving issues at scale. We find ourselves in need of the very collectivism you detest; We find ourselves, in need of powerful States.
In this circumstance, what would you do?
Would you, like the conservatives in the west, and businessmen, leave us in the open, subject to the forces of this ferocious enemy? Should we let ourselves get devoured in the hopes of sustaining the market?
I do not believe so, and through your very words, I know it not to be so. After all, it is through you that many had come to know of the necessity of liberty; the necessity of individual choice; the necessity that the actions of individuals be free from coercion.
Then why do your admirers, those who consider themselves walking in your very shoes, believe themselves so blatantly right? Why do they so blatantly coerce the public into sacrificing their lives for this mechanism of social good; that what we deem to be the markets?
You proclaimed the markets to be a functioning mechanism for the determination of our needs. But why is it that we see many who believe this mechanism as something other than a means towards social good?
In the midst of this great enemy, we see many be willing to sacrifice the lives of others. But they boast and proclaim, “Let them be free” or “Return to them the freedom they have toiled for”. Given that they know all too well what the cost of such a risk is, and yet, seek to push this rhetoric to advance their own interests, is this not a form of external coercion of the individual? More importantly, is this not a case for a new role of the state as well as a new infrastructure taming the state?
The markets have become corrupted. They are truly far from free. So distorted are the signs in the markets from the actualities of the lives of the individuals. And yet, many who claim themselves your staunchest advocates, believe this to be for the greater good.
What would you say to them? Could it be, that perhaps they were never truly followers of yours? Could it perhaps be, that they were ignorant of the true intent of your message? No. It is far more sinister than that. In our day and age, the invisible hand has been laid bare and is obviously being used by those both within the dysfunctional hierarchy of the state and from without. Together, they cooperate to impair the rights of the individual.
What say you then of this unfortunate turn of events Hayek? You obviously didn’t advocate the absence of the state. In fact, you advocated that the state be capable of functioning. But so strong was your aversion for the capability of the state for social good, that we see nothing but an incapable state. A state whose ability to function had been blunted from a lack of use and rigorous testing.
So absent are some states that, the focus of the market as the greatest tool for organization, may just be what leads to its misuse from its inherent tool as a mechanism for social good.
On the other hand, we see your very words ring true. The presence of an overarching state in the organization of people has led to an increased deterioration in the freedoms of the individuals living therein. This pandemic may have given the states unprecedented dictatorship over the lives of the individual. Those nations that find themselves on such a path already showed an affinity to central planning and control or had effectively built planned economies.
To you, my question then is, if the market can be made to act coercively against the rights and liberties of the people, and the presence of an all-powerful state may do the same, what is the perfect balance between them? Through what means can we keep their powers of coercion at bay?
Is there a general rule that applies to the creation of systems that balances their applications?
I have come to believe there needs to be a new mechanism that helps reduce coercion of the individual by coercive forces. We find ourselves in the midst of technology with the power to do so. But given the nature of the market and the desire for profit, we are seeing a commodification of its potential and hence a blunting of its effectiveness.
We find ourselves in unprecedented times, and I would have hoped to hear your voice in regards to this. It is as such sad, that a voice as discerning as yours, no longer finds itself in our midst, for we find ourselves in revolutionary times…