1. Skip to navigation
  2. Skip to content
  3. Skip to sidebar
Source link: http://archive.mises.org/16053/overt-and-covert-socialisms/

Overt and Covert Socialisms

March 16, 2011 by

Gradual approaches toward socialism, like the one the United States is currently taking, often rely on overtly socializing an industry via nationalization here and covertly socializing an industry via market interventions there. And one type of socialization often leads to the other. FULL ARTICLE by Daniel James Sanchez


DixieFlatline March 16, 2011 at 10:19 am

I really enjoyed this article for who it speaks to.

Amanojack March 16, 2011 at 11:16 am

Excellent. Clarifying. Every word was worth reading.

Jim March 16, 2011 at 11:28 am

One of the best articles I have read on Mises Daily!

Leo March 16, 2011 at 4:10 pm

Eureka! I finally understand why there is no “middle way.” Thank you, Mr. Sanchez!

Libertarian jerry March 16, 2011 at 7:33 pm

Excellent article. In reality all 10 planks to the communist Manifesto have been layered into the American Society. The Income tax,Inheritance tax,Public Education,State credit etc.etc. But if one would study further,they would find that most of the wealth and power in America is controlled by about 600 families. This controlling by the “man behind the curtain” or the Wizard of Oz,if you may,has been going on for decades in America. The controlling is not only done by buying off politicians and judges,but through ownership of most of the Main Stream Media. This controlling,by the elite,is done through Corporations,Trusts,Endowments,Foundations plus influencing the content of the Education and Academia systems. In the end “Socialism” is really a way for the elites to own and control most of our nation.

A Liberal in Lakeview March 16, 2011 at 7:57 pm

“either to abstain from interference in the free play of the market, or to delegate the entire management of production and distribution to the government. Either capitalism or socialism…”

-LvM, in Chapter 2, 5. Interventionism.

Ok, so what did Mises have to say about the provision of protection services? Well, he was clear enough when sneering at anarchists in the very same book from which the quote above was taken. Monopoly must prevail. In other words, the “entire management of the production” of security must be in the hands of the government. “Everybody in. Nobody out”, as Pat Quinn, governor of Illinois, likes to say.

It follows that Mises chose socialism. The irony is that section four of Ch. 2 is titled “The Impracticability of Socialism”. By the time you finish Ch. 3, Liberal Foreign Policy, Mises is daydreaming about the good that could be done by ein Ueberstaat der Staaten, a superstate of states, and ein Weltueberstaat, a world superstate, and that in spite of excoriating the League of Nations for its flaws.

Of course, there’s no logical basis for supposing that either the morality or the laws of economics which apply to other services cease to be at work when security is provided. Even Mises observed that “[a]ll state activity is human action, an evil inflicted by men on men.” (Ch. 1, 13. The State and Antisocial Conduct.) Sure enough, Mises had his rationalizations for his necessary evil.

It’s difficult to see how the incoherency in Mises’ thinking did not lead to a complete break between Mises and Rothbard, who was fully aware of Mises’ obstinate conservatism and muddleheaded thinking about society and aggression. Perhaps Rothbard granted Mises a free pass given his accomplishments in economic theory. Whatever the reason, it’s not hard to figure out why Catholics and other Christians would be drawn to the LvMI. Their objective, too, is ein Weltueberstaat, albeit with a nasty little theocratic twist and a whole lot of priestcraft. Sure enough, the rationalizations include a burning desire for world peace.

Acts 5:1-11.

Jonathan M. F. Catalán March 17, 2011 at 12:02 am

A Liberal in Lakeview,

While one could certainly make the argument that Mises’s views on the enforcement of property rights are erroneous (and people have), it’s not fair to make the claim that Mises was inconsistent. Mises is clear, there is either capitalism or socialism. You can’t say that one part of an economy is socialist, or that a policy is socialist. A socialist economy is an economy characterized by the collective ownership of the means of production.

Force is monopolized by the state. This does not mean that we therefore live in a socialist economy. The majority of the means of production are still privately owned. All the same, protective services are mostly organized and funded by the government. These organizations may not be privately owned, but it does not follow that therefore they are socialist. Socialism doesn’t refer to particular portions of an economy. It characterizes all the means of production.

Regarding Rothbard, it is safe to say that he was an intelligent thinker. It doesn’t make sense for Rothbard to discard the majority of Mises’s ideas, just because he disagrees with Mises on political organization. For what it’s worth, there was a complete break between Mises and Rothbard in regards to politics. One believed in the value of government, the other was an anarchist.

Troy Doering March 17, 2011 at 1:36 am

I think by 2150 history classes around the world will examine the fall of America, They will determine that it was a mix of Corruption and incompetence that crushed the mighty nation. Not a future I want, but the writing is on the wall. With our present leaders regardless of party, It is the most likely outcome. the Democrats offer a slow strangling death like we see Europe experiencing. Were the Republicans offer a quick death like that of Communist Russia. But were probably only taking a difference of three to five years. I will say sometime between 2020 and 2046.

Robert G March 17, 2011 at 10:32 am

Covert Socialism, Interventionism and “Weltueberstaat” mindset is a way of life in the US that very few notice: A majority thinks that the government “should do something about x, y, z”. And most apparatchiks in DC are absolutely convinced that they intervene for the good of the people. JUST TODAY: Elizabeth Warren chiming in on indemnifying certain homeowners, let me just focus here on the unstoppable urge to cajole others. The chairman of the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission parenting the equally intervening Japanese government on what radiation threats are. A clear dynamics of government folks to overpower others believing in their hearts that they have a better motive than anyone else. Pentagon pressing for a no-drive zone in Lybia. These people do more harm to the entirety of the mortgage / housing industry than the banks ever could inflict, more harm and panic to Japan and surrounding nations than worst case nuclear radiation itself, and more harm to the Lybian opposition than Ghadafi himself.

Jkillz March 17, 2011 at 11:19 pm


Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: