Jim Hlavac
| Politics Home The Practicalist The Socialist Era Politics Re-Explained Fundamentals Domestic Affairs Economic Theory Foreign Affairs Libertarian Ideas Political Theory Philosophy Royalty & Theology |
Economic Theory
| Economic Theory |
It seems that the biggest problem in every religion, in every
phiolosophy, in every pseudo political reasoning, is the belief that
there is only one way -- This way! And that all other ideas are to be
trammeled upon for the good of all. Every theory has this grand over
archiving view of Man! -- writ big. Whether Randian objectivism, or
Marixian proletariats, or even some self-claimed capitalist -- we should
all be entreprenueurs. Look at even our president -- everyone should
go to college. The Muslim fundamentalists and the catholics alike, small
sects, what ever religion -- we should all be alike.
And when you get to governments like Saddam Hussein and North
Korea and China -- we should all think like the leader -- whether
Saddam or Mao -- there is this idea that every person must think alike
or the people will collapse. Kings had the same idea in Feudal times,
as the Roman Emperors, and Pharaoh before them -- let's all think the
same way -- so that the world can move along. Yet what happens
when we all think alike -- the world stops moving ahead! Even
individualists and libertarians -- they think we should all think alike and
anything else would be damaging to the intrinsic goodness of their
theories.
And after all aren't they really all just theories? Not one religion or
political theory has ever had enough sway to complete destroy any
other ideas or influences. Why? Because ideas will well up out of the
minds of men the likes of which no one knows. When these ideas
surface, no mater how innocuous they are -- the keepers of the true
thought do all they can to stamp out the offending person.
About the only place on earth that we got away from this one-size
fits all concept of man was the United States. Unfortunately, the vast
power of conformism has crept into the country. Hence the power of
the Federal Government to try to make every State do the same thing.
It is the majesty of the states that keeps this from happening, or at
least slowing it down. One of hallmarks of federalism, or state's rights,
is the idea that each smaller unit of the whole has its own way, and
that makes for a stronger whole. Imagine if each cell of the body did
the same thing -- we'd be square pieces of protoplasm!
Look at every part of an eco-system -- each element has a place, to do
what it likes, in one sense being Objectivist in a Randian sence, at the
same time it can't help but act altruistically. And it can't help but come
up with new strategies to deal with the problems at hand -- or the
evolution of the situation. Yet, each individual stays very much itself.
The forest is like the government, it provides a number of tools. The
individuals within it use the tools as they see fit. No one is either
forced to use, or prevented from using, certain tools. But still the
place functions in a rather orderly anarchism.
What each political theorist or economic theorist wants to propose
is that there is one and only one way to think about something or do
something. But as we move from printed paper and a limited
technology of assessment to a much more technologically advanced
society we can see that there are any number of different causes and
outcomes from any one theory or action or economic circumstance.
We have been imbued through the socialist ideal of equality to
think that everyone belongs in college. It is actually an easier concept
to handle than "all people have equal access to the same tools, but
don't really have to use them."
Our current notions of fairness and equality stem from Marx, and
from the Catholic Church -- hence their parallel. Somehow we are all
identical and thus we should all react the same way to a given stimuli.
You can hear it in the presidents promotion of a certain tax cut -- "it
will make people do this -- " -- but will it? Won't just some people do
that -- and still others do nothing different, or something opposite
from what the theory says we should do?
And what I call this is "Practicalism" -- people will be practical
according to their own ideas and merits, and there will be no one way
something is dealt with from any angle. And thus all of society will be
better off as the differences feed off each other and give each other a
little taste of something different. This Practicalism has no form, no
doctrine, no ideal, no set of directives -- it just is merely the
combined responses of millions of people. The more people who are
Practicalists -- the richer societies, and individuals will be -- America is
the most Practicalist country -- where no one idea or theory is for all --
and the only thing for all is the "tools" -- that is the workings of the
llaws and the government system. Did we ever reach this perfect
Practicalist way -- no we can not -- for it does not exist. There is no
end of the idea -- of the theory. There is no "outcome" which reaches
nirvanna.
There was a time in America's past when people did think there
was one great way -- and that led to slavery, and to civil war, and to
all sorts of problems. Now there is a move in a different direction
towards some sort of absolute -- this is the way it is going to be.
Indeed, with every new supreme court ruling, and with every new
election cycle those who are fruitlessly looking for the finality of
theory -- as all of the political teachings since the Pharaohs say there
should be -- these people are wringing their hands at the non-finality
of it all. Indeed, it is this very lack of finality which makes America
great -- because no matter where you are in the process, you know
that your case can be made, no matter how supposedly final the
Supreme Court or Congress or the President rules, you know that there
is going to be some other incremental change. Nothing is final in
America. That's what makes us always ready for some new challenge
or idea, that's what makes us Practicalists. We are forever on the
lookout for what could be the practical solution for the moment for any
given problem, and we know that the problem itself might change, and
thus we should come up with a different practical solution to it.
This practicalism is best when done by the most amount of people.
Having a million brains on one problem is more practical than having
just the central committee, or some bureaucrat's office dictate. It's
like combining a lot of computers to do the same problem, by doing
just tiny bits of it, and then combining the whole. The more freedom
people have to work out their part of the problem as they see it the
better off everyone is in the end run. Whether cooperatively, or
individually, the solution is found.
phiolosophy, in every pseudo political reasoning, is the belief that
there is only one way -- This way! And that all other ideas are to be
trammeled upon for the good of all. Every theory has this grand over
archiving view of Man! -- writ big. Whether Randian objectivism, or
Marixian proletariats, or even some self-claimed capitalist -- we should
all be entreprenueurs. Look at even our president -- everyone should
go to college. The Muslim fundamentalists and the catholics alike, small
sects, what ever religion -- we should all be alike.
And when you get to governments like Saddam Hussein and North
Korea and China -- we should all think like the leader -- whether
Saddam or Mao -- there is this idea that every person must think alike
or the people will collapse. Kings had the same idea in Feudal times,
as the Roman Emperors, and Pharaoh before them -- let's all think the
same way -- so that the world can move along. Yet what happens
when we all think alike -- the world stops moving ahead! Even
individualists and libertarians -- they think we should all think alike and
anything else would be damaging to the intrinsic goodness of their
theories.
And after all aren't they really all just theories? Not one religion or
political theory has ever had enough sway to complete destroy any
other ideas or influences. Why? Because ideas will well up out of the
minds of men the likes of which no one knows. When these ideas
surface, no mater how innocuous they are -- the keepers of the true
thought do all they can to stamp out the offending person.
About the only place on earth that we got away from this one-size
fits all concept of man was the United States. Unfortunately, the vast
power of conformism has crept into the country. Hence the power of
the Federal Government to try to make every State do the same thing.
It is the majesty of the states that keeps this from happening, or at
least slowing it down. One of hallmarks of federalism, or state's rights,
is the idea that each smaller unit of the whole has its own way, and
that makes for a stronger whole. Imagine if each cell of the body did
the same thing -- we'd be square pieces of protoplasm!
Look at every part of an eco-system -- each element has a place, to do
what it likes, in one sense being Objectivist in a Randian sence, at the
same time it can't help but act altruistically. And it can't help but come
up with new strategies to deal with the problems at hand -- or the
evolution of the situation. Yet, each individual stays very much itself.
The forest is like the government, it provides a number of tools. The
individuals within it use the tools as they see fit. No one is either
forced to use, or prevented from using, certain tools. But still the
place functions in a rather orderly anarchism.
What each political theorist or economic theorist wants to propose
is that there is one and only one way to think about something or do
something. But as we move from printed paper and a limited
technology of assessment to a much more technologically advanced
society we can see that there are any number of different causes and
outcomes from any one theory or action or economic circumstance.
We have been imbued through the socialist ideal of equality to
think that everyone belongs in college. It is actually an easier concept
to handle than "all people have equal access to the same tools, but
don't really have to use them."
Our current notions of fairness and equality stem from Marx, and
from the Catholic Church -- hence their parallel. Somehow we are all
identical and thus we should all react the same way to a given stimuli.
You can hear it in the presidents promotion of a certain tax cut -- "it
will make people do this -- " -- but will it? Won't just some people do
that -- and still others do nothing different, or something opposite
from what the theory says we should do?
And what I call this is "Practicalism" -- people will be practical
according to their own ideas and merits, and there will be no one way
something is dealt with from any angle. And thus all of society will be
better off as the differences feed off each other and give each other a
little taste of something different. This Practicalism has no form, no
doctrine, no ideal, no set of directives -- it just is merely the
combined responses of millions of people. The more people who are
Practicalists -- the richer societies, and individuals will be -- America is
the most Practicalist country -- where no one idea or theory is for all --
and the only thing for all is the "tools" -- that is the workings of the
llaws and the government system. Did we ever reach this perfect
Practicalist way -- no we can not -- for it does not exist. There is no
end of the idea -- of the theory. There is no "outcome" which reaches
nirvanna.
There was a time in America's past when people did think there
was one great way -- and that led to slavery, and to civil war, and to
all sorts of problems. Now there is a move in a different direction
towards some sort of absolute -- this is the way it is going to be.
Indeed, with every new supreme court ruling, and with every new
election cycle those who are fruitlessly looking for the finality of
theory -- as all of the political teachings since the Pharaohs say there
should be -- these people are wringing their hands at the non-finality
of it all. Indeed, it is this very lack of finality which makes America
great -- because no matter where you are in the process, you know
that your case can be made, no matter how supposedly final the
Supreme Court or Congress or the President rules, you know that there
is going to be some other incremental change. Nothing is final in
America. That's what makes us always ready for some new challenge
or idea, that's what makes us Practicalists. We are forever on the
lookout for what could be the practical solution for the moment for any
given problem, and we know that the problem itself might change, and
thus we should come up with a different practical solution to it.
This practicalism is best when done by the most amount of people.
Having a million brains on one problem is more practical than having
just the central committee, or some bureaucrat's office dictate. It's
like combining a lot of computers to do the same problem, by doing
just tiny bits of it, and then combining the whole. The more freedom
people have to work out their part of the problem as they see it the
better off everyone is in the end run. Whether cooperatively, or
individually, the solution is found.