What Crusaders for Liberty Are Up Against
By Robert Higgs • Monday July 2, 2012 2:40 PM PDT • 22 Comments
If you were setting out to organize a crusade to “restore the American Republic” or some such, you would need to know what sort of people you are trying to enlist in your movement. I have drawn up two short lists to assist you.
Fourteen things in which many Americans have an interest: shirking on the job; getting high; getting drunk; overeating; bad movies with lots of CGI and explosions; football and many other sports; God-awful “music”; gossip about celebrities and their weight, wardrobes, and divorces; gossip about rich people and European aristocrats; fighting with their spouses; trouble with their kids; paying the bills; getting on disability, welfare of some sort, or collecting social security payments; ways to avoid paying for their own medical care.
Fourteen things in which few Americans have an interest: liberty; growth of the state; abuse of state power; out-of-control police; sending millions of young blacks to prison, many for victimless crimes; impending financial breakdown of the welfare state; U.S. imperialism, except to root for it; aggressive U.S. wars, except to root for them; excessive government debt; excessive personal debt; living beyond their means; vulgarity that pervades popular culture; people’s general shamelessness on TV and elsewhere in public; saddling future generations with bills for current government outlays.
(The foregoing observations were prompted by Karen Kwiatkowski’s article describing her recent campaign for a Republican congressional nomination.)
Tags: Culture, Liberty, Morality, Personal Liberty, Politics, The State 
I find the dichotomy you’re proposing here suspicious.
For one, you are saying that the problem is that people are focused on personal matters, not systemic ones. That’s a personalistic reduction in the first place, not a systemic analysis.
Second, the things you flag as important have a stink of conservative moralism about them, with the one exception of a seemingly superficial concern with mass incarceration. The first part of what people “should” be caring about center on opposition to Big Government, while the second part is what you might call a modernist rejection of low culture. The “solution” to the first (if it can be put in a single phrase) is an end to neoliberalism in government, whether that requires Big Government or not.
Meanwhile, if people are being stupidated (and they are) then why fault them for focusing only on personal matters (which is all they can rely upon as true, from immediate experience). The education system (and the media) have ensured they and we must remain ignorant of the wider, systemic issues that they and we are trapped by and in. This makes the appearance of concern for culture here just old-fashioned fuddy-duddiness and window dressing for “more civilization”. Goodness knows, I’d like to see more reflective culture, but the stink of retrogression here in your list cannot possibly open a window on what crusaders are really up against or what needs to be done. The distraction you are proposing is a key way to maintain the status quo. So, please try again, if you’re serious.
talastra | Jul 2, 2012 | Reply
A number of thoughts come to mind here.
One, is that I once tried to untangle a dog that had been purposely twisted up in a chain by a few other boys. The dog decided to bite me. Wrong approach on my part I guess.
Another thought that comes mind is a quote I read tonight from David Friedman’s Hidden Order: “we learn not through logic alone but by a complicated process of feel, feedback and intuition.” This is important because people are unhappy for various reasons, and in some cases they don’t understand the causes of their unhappiness because of the nature and complexity of the extended order and the basic, yet important economic ideas required to understand the extended order. In other words the feedback loops associated with the extended order are more complicated and difficult to utilize.
Another thought and the most important for the Independent Institute is that freedom and economics have to be marketed in a way that makes people interested in them. The best way to do this in my opinion is to combine your two lists above. For example sell them a mix of getting high with some Theory of Moral Sentiments. Put together a great action flick set in a self-governed world. Fight the Century is a great example of music and economic ideas. Create a romance comedy about a politician who falls in love with a free market economist. I’m not a marketing guy, but I know people buy stuff they love, and they will buy freedom and economic education if they love it. People don’t know what they’re missing though. People don’t know what they want if it doesn’t exist. People didn’t realize they would love iPods, iPhone, and Macbook Pros before they existed.
To put it most succinctly the freedom movement needs a Steve Jobs and a corporation like Apple, but which sells freedom.
Scott G | Jul 2, 2012 | Reply
“To put it most succinctly the freedom movement needs a Steve Jobs and a corporation like Apple, but which sells freedom.”
That store is already open, originally in Pinochet’s Chile, in the US since 1980, and bright spanking new franchises in Iraq and Afghanistan. They’re thinking about opening a branch in Iran.
The problem is, the product is defective. There have been a lot of returns, although returns aren’t accepted. Many people trying to return returns were occupying Wall Street, till the Store told them to go away. (Other returnees were elsewhere, Oakland, etc.) Peru had a branch office, until plummeting literacy and untenable debt payments forced them to shut it down.
This isn’t the same product that was offered more than 60 years ago, although that product had its problems too. Whatever changes in manufacturing freedom have occurred, the product is just shite now–maybe the Walmartification of the thing, hard to tell. I’m not about to blame the defectiveness on outsourced labor. Maybe there’s now a built-in obsolenscence? I prefer not to get my freedom from that store, so I’m not that “up” on it.
I think maybe some serious R&D is in order. Some focus groups asking people what they really want. The current “new and improved” product is worse than New Coke. What a debacle.
talastra | Jul 2, 2012 | Reply
After over 50 years of observing the effects of Public Education,Cultural Marxism and the Welfare State on the American population I’ve come to certain conclusions about the situation in America that the statistics can back me up on. 1st. Half the population don’t vote. 2nd. Half the population don’t pay any Income Taxes. 3rd. Most of the taxes in America are paid by the top 20%of the population. 3rd. Only about 30% of the population are net tax payers and support the other 70% of the population that are net tax consumers. 4th. The percentage of net tax payers in America,in relation to the rest of the population,is shrinking every year. With that said,how many people on the government gravy train would care to get off of that train and be with the 30% who create most of the wealth? Despite certain social issues(gay marriage,Pro choice/Pro Life,gun control etc.)most people who do vote,vote their economic interests. The point being if you are running for political office in a district that has a heavy population of people on the government gravy train and you profess a philosophy of limited government function and the dismantling of that gravy train then your chances of winning an election is slim to none and slim just left town. Still,Karen needs to be congratulated on achieving what she did.
libertarian jerry | Jul 3, 2012 | Reply
The total taxes paid by the upper 1% and lowest 20% are about the same per cent of income. Most writers are considering only federal income tax in their analysis.
richard | Jul 3, 2012 | Reply
Yes, as noted some years ago, the masses are ignorant, arrogant, gullible, and infantile.
richard | Jul 3, 2012 | Reply
Scott – Check out the Free Interprise Institute, maybe what you are looking for.
J. Christianson | Jul 3, 2012 | Reply
Jerry,
While we agree on the statistics, what you leave out of your summation is the top 1% has seen their income grow by leaps and bounds since the mid 1970s. In 1975 the top corporate head earned 60 times the wage of the company’s lowest paid worker. In 2008 that same guy earned 360 times more than the lowest paid worker.
The unequal disbursement of wages has resulted in a rising lower class encroaching on what used to be our middle class, creating a divide of haves and have nots. Every person needs three things to survive – food, shelter and clothing. When a working man cannot achieve these fundamental goals by working two things happen – he looks to other sources to provide it, or what we will see happen very soon – he will steal it. Historically we can see when people are oppressed they rise up in anger and become violent.
50% don’t pay any tax – quite simply because they are living so poorly they cannot afford to pay it. So, the rich man controlling all the weath either needs to share the wealth with those that brought him to the dance, or carry the tax burden, since they cannot have it all.
Fundamentally capitalism is great – the only flaw is that it has no moral consciousness. Moral consciousness is why our forefathers when they developed our nation incorporated God as a building block, as a moral compass to guide us in not exploiting our fellow man. Afterall, we know the colonists were exploited by King George until they threw the tea in the harbor to protest taxation. It’s coming again and we seem powerless to stop it.
One law would fix it all of our financial woes, that being one that outlines a certain percentage of gross profits be reinvested in the work force either in raises or benefits. When we raise up the discretionary spending of the working class – that fellow spends money. Sales of goods and services increases demand, and is echoed in a need for fulfilling supply = more jobs, more prosperity for everyone, and a lesser tax burden on the wealthiest. Capping profits and forcing a reinvestment in the labor force also encourages corporate owners who want and lust over more money to create separate companies to grow their money.
What we have now is a small percentage with all the money sitting on it like a nest egg, not reinvesting, not spending and taking it willfully from the working class with no regard.
Enough is enough! The time has come for legislation to cap profits. These fellows can earn as much as they like but no more sucking off 100% of the profits from one company like a succubus and leaving our country impoverished.
Elizabeth | Jul 3, 2012 | Reply
Wise observations. As Richard said, some how even most liberty movement types miss just how much tax is paid by all Americans. Even if one lives in a state without sales tax on food, taxes are still paid on every item one buys. Take a can of beans for instance. The farmer pays super high fuel taxes, property taxes, perhaps use taxes, payroll taxes, and taxes on most if not all supplies and equipment; all of which is passed onto whomever purchases the beans. The transportation company that picks up his crop pays all the above taxes as well. The packaging company pays all these taxes plus perhaps import taxes for the metal to be turned into cans. The distribution company again pays these taxes. Finally the grocer is faced with these same taxes. Thus the potential $1 can of beans with no sales tax may still equal 40% tax.
Phillip McDaniel | Jul 3, 2012 | Reply
Like me.
Terry Derwitsch | Jul 3, 2012 | Reply
“Religious Freedom is America’s most precious possession and must be preserved...” –former Senator from North Carolina, Sam Ervin.
And, RELIGIOUS FREEDOMS ARE NEXT ON THE HIT-LIST FOR OBAMA! Just as he FAILED MISERABLY with ‘GUN-CONTROL’, in light of ‘Fast and Furious’, he will FAIL IN RELIGIOUS PERSECUTION – if the King gets another 4 years. The DEMOCRATS are all LIBERALS NOW, in my mind, until somebody steps up and proves otherwise! Because the term ‘HATE-SPEECH’ for Religious Organizations is presently being employed, see Gainesville.com Poll. It’s very disturbing and a very real threat, and I’m giving you RELIGIOUS FREEDOM LOVERS (like myself) a ‘heads-up’ -as you’re next!
~gatorgi70x7
Greg | Jul 3, 2012 | Reply
Very well stated Scott G.
Amanda | Jul 3, 2012 | Reply
I agree with the lists. They demonstrate the futility of explaining libertarian values to the masses and trying to get more than a handful to adopt them. What should libertarians in the USA do?
Should we attempt to fight the ever-increasing numbers of anti-libertarian actions of federal, state, and local governments?
– No. We’ve continually lost ground for generations.
Should we emigrate to New Zealand or buy and populate a remote island?
– Yes. I believe that libertarianism can exist only where the vast majority of the population has libertarian values. John Galt chose the right path.
MingoV | Jul 3, 2012 | Reply
I noticed that “collecting Social Security payments” was one of your negative comments above. I am 68-years young and I draw a SS check. I do not in any way consider it a handout from the government! For almost 50 years I was FORCED to pay each payday into the federal revenue coffers. That was in an agreement that when I reached a certain age I would start getting some of that “investment” back in installments. Because Congress betrayed our trust and spent our investment on other things in no way makes me a dependent of the government. Again, I did not have a choice but to “save” for my old age via SS deductions!!!!
Jack Harrell | Jul 3, 2012 | Reply
MingoV – The answer is simple. Libertarians have to congregate some place in order to achieve a simple majority. So, more than likely, you will need to move. Once upon a time, people from Europe moved to avoid religious persecution. Now you have to move to avoid government interference and tyranny. Read up on the “Free State Project”. I’m starting a “Free County Project” which is a much more realistic goal.
Guy Daley | Jul 4, 2012 | Reply
Elizabeth.................Your thesis is the same philosophy I’ve fought against all my life. Its the typical socialist/collectivist belief that everything belongs to everyone and its called “the wealth.” The zero sum philosophy that if I have more wealth then my neighbor then I must have stolen it from him. Its like there’s a money tree somewhere and I took more then my “fair share.” In a free market economy the wealth that I create belongs to me not to some vague entity called “society” to be redistributed at the whim of politicians and bureaucrats. Again there is no entity called “the money” sitting somewhere. Property rights,including the right to keep the fruits of one’s labor are sacrosanct. To have a socialistic system like you desire will not grow any economy but destroy incentives and liberty. What someone earns in a hands off market economy is nobody’s business, including the State. If you really study statistics you would find that on all levels: Federal,State and local government now takes over 60% of America’s GDP. The more government takes the more wealth is wasted and not plowed back into economic growth. What you want is a Soviet style redistribution system where the productive are penalized and the lazy and incompetent are rewarded. Its the same old same old gutter philosophy of Socialists throughout history. Socialism is the philosophy of the lazy,the philosophy of envy and the philosophy of megalomaniacs. What you want has never worked in the history of mankind and created misery and stacks of corpses wherever its been tried. Also,you take the image of Capitalism and smear it with accusations of “no moral consciousness.”which is total nonsense. True Capitalism is not the crony Capitalism of insider trading and taxpayer bailouts. True Capitalism is a free market with laws to protect the integrity of the market producing the highest standards of living in the 5000 year history of civilization. It is completely moral simply because of any kind of immoral action on the part of businessmen would destroy that businessman’s credibility and eventually his business. Profits,in a free market,are the legitimate rewards of businessmen given to them by consumers voting with their dollars to buy that businessman’s products or services. Again,the biggest luster for money is the government and the Political Class. The parasites who live off of the government gravy train. The Political Class that impoverish the Economic Class with confiscatory taxes,endless money inflation and an unpayable National Debt that keeps the productive American in constant debt servitude. All attempts by government to create laws that direct or cap profits have always landed in disaster. What has raised people’s standard of living over the last 200 years has been the profits that have been created by businessmen. Profits that are plowed back into their businesses. In America we created the highest standard of living and the largest middle class in history. Yet,this heritage has been all but destroyed not by true capitalists but by an over reaching socialist government that wants to centrally control economic activity. The more “laws” that you advocate the worse things become. If you want to destroy whats left of the middle class and the “working class” then what you advocate should be put into law. If you want to restore the economy and truly help working men and women at all levels then the laws that you advocate should be shunned.
libertarian jerry | Jul 5, 2012 | Reply
The system is structurally incapable of electing freedom-lovers; in fact it is designed to exclude such. And it is amazingly successful at doing that – Ron Paul is the exception that proves the rule. I guess Karen either hasn’t learned that lesson, or she likes tilting against windmills (yes, there are people who love the conflict of a political campaign).
For the rest of us in the remnant, we might as well get some popcorn, sit back and watch the system crash. And look to our own lives...
Paul Bonneau | Jul 6, 2012 | Reply
Elizabeth,
You point concearning the existences of income inequality is true. It exists and tends to get wider over time.
But is that truly bad when “consumption inequality” has progressively shrunk over time for the very same people?
Most of the poor people (in the US) you speak about have a measure of food security (contrary to what many advocacy groups say) and live much better than the middle class or even the rich of a century ago. The poor today consume much more than ever and have innovations and other things in life that the rich of yesteryear would have been in amazement at.
Income inequality matters little when compared to actual consumption inequality. The reason is because differeces in income do not translate into one having more at the other’s expense. A rich person is not rich because the poor person missed out. A poor person is not poor because a rich person got lucky (the truth is most rich people have sacrificed huge amounts of time and alternatives to get where they are; 8 out of 10 rich people earned their money, not inherited it). Just because Mr. Rich Man or Ms. Rich Woman got filthy rich does not mean that makes me worse off. The income pie is not fixed (zero-sum). My losses do not occur at a rich person’s gains. So why penalize the rich when they have sacrificed to get where they are?
Make sure to take Libertarian Jerry’s response seriously. Think about it: putting a cap on profits means that the government is essentially saying that companies are pleasing their customers too much.
Why destroy peaceful interactions between innocent people?
You have a point when the situation is “crony capitalism” which is where the government gives out favors and priviliges to entrenched or favored businesses. Libertarians advocate ending that. But true and real capitalism is the most moral peaceful activity on earth. When you advocate ending it or restricting it because some people do not earn as much as others, you are advocating violence instead of peace. Think about it some more.
Beth | Jul 7, 2012 | Reply
@Jack – there never was a Socialist Security ‘lock box’. You never were going to get your money back, you are getting money from my paycheck and from the paycheck of every current worker. You’re on welfare. Accept it and get over it.
I wish I could lay my finger on it, maybe someone can point me to a link, but I remember reading or seeing that each SS recipient who retires, on average, gets back a sum equal to their contributions after 2 years of retirement.
Paul | Jul 10, 2012 | Reply
I don’t disagree with you. People may be worth saving, but I think they’re beyond saving. It is going to take a massive (biblical) chastisement for hundreds of millions to regain morality and common sense. If we are known by our fruits, then the fruit today is pretty rotten. People will obey power, for the greatest thing they have to lose, to them, is their lives. They would rather be a slave to man and sin then the liberating laws of God. I am only a young man, but I see a pure connection between the West’s loss of Christianity and the destruction of this civilization. Reading Antonio Gramsci provides much support for my statement.
bill | Jul 12, 2012 | Reply