1. Skip to navigation
  2. Skip to content
  3. Skip to sidebar
Source link: http://archive.mises.org/6981/reality-vs-the-state/

Reality vs. the State

August 14, 2007 by

If you have boarded an airplane recently, you know something about how the state lives in a strange, alternative universe in which good sense, normal courtesies, and sound judgment play no role. No aspect of life is perfect, but the sectors the state manages are wacky and topsy-turvy.

Thus we are expected to believe that every living person who boards an airplane is a potential terrorist, and every person is just as much a risk as every other person. We are expected to believe that because the state forces us to carry deodorant in a little baggy, that we are safer from hijackings than we would otherwise be. We are supposed to gain comfort when we see a TSA employee testing a tube of toothpaste to make sure that it won’t explode on board. FULL ARTICLE

{ 3 comments }

Brad August 14, 2007 at 8:49 am

Much of the world can be viewed in terms of statistical curves. Some curves may be tighter, some more spread out, but most observable phenomona seem to distribute into a bell curve. Therefore one would expect that public policy should reflect and respond to the basic distributions occuring naturally and only react when something happens that is outside the bulk of the distribution, like most people gladly honoring life and property of others, but if they don’t (i.e. stray from the norm and deviate too much) then some sort of force is used against them.

But then we’ve gone well beyond that, we’ve made laws a long time ago to address basic deviant behavior. Yet government “progresses” ever on. Government, at the risk of failing, which it will most likely do, hedges their bets by assuming everyone is in the statistical tail instead of the bulk around the mean. This leads to the nightmarish routines we see at airports, the twisted logics used against peaceful citizens. The more government pushes the envelope of “safety” the more artificially crammed we are under the narrowest part of the curve. The basic problem is that public policy is out of tune with “natural law”.

Perhaps a bit labored on my part, but it seems that more and more public policy wags the proverbial dog by the statistical tail. And we can’t do much about it. I suppose that if enough people revolted and didn’t allow indignities be thrust upon them by the bureaucrats then perhaps we would revert back to a freer society albeit with perhaps slightly higher risks. But we are cowed and we subserve. And we put up with all sorts of inanities because the price seems too high. We’ll see what happens when the economic blow out happens, which it most assuredly will. And when people have a whole lot less to risk as savings plans go belly up, and ever more people lose their houses, we’ll see just how much basic stupidity people are willing to put up with from the bureaucracy.

Reactionary August 14, 2007 at 4:01 pm

A friend points out that the US government can’t even be described as authoritarian like, for example, Chile under Pinochet. Rather, it approaches totalitarian in that it must distort and attempt an artificial reality so its lunacy appears normal.

Bruce Koerber August 15, 2007 at 10:12 pm

It is true that a gold standard dries up the lies; and it is true that politicians without ‘funny money’ are like parasites without a host.
I think one of the greatest weapons against the ego-driven interventionists is to link ethics to economics and one of the many champions doing this is Ron Paul.
When every act of every interventionist is seen as unethical – and the gold standard is one of the clear tests to be used for such a judgement – the words of the interventionsts will hang exposed in the air like sulfuric pollution.

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: