“One reason conservatives are so happy and [l]efists are so miserable is that capitalists need friends,” wrote Evan Sayet. “They need business partners and investors, trading partners and customers so satisfied they come back again and again.It has always struck me as a significant blindspot of ideologues on the left, that business people depend on both the goodwill of the public and on understanding the needs and desires of their customers. No doubt there are hard-nosed decisions that have to be made along the way in terms of hiring enough people but not too many, charging enough but not too much, etc. But as a general system, it works pretty well to optimize human connectedness and desires given limited resources.
“The socialist needs enemies,” Sayet went on. “There must be people who hate him and oppress him. If he’s not hated and oppressed then socialism doesn’t exist.
“If he [the socialist] can’t find any such hatred, he’s forced to make it up,” Sayet continued. “‘Dog whistles’ – he knows what you’re REALLY saying – and ‘micro-aggressions’ are all invented nonsense because this ‘oppression’ simply MUST be true or else there’s no socialist movement (and no free things.)”
Sayet concluded: “The socialist doesn't need to work well with others because he doesn't work. What he needs is an excuse to justify his theft.”
The most obvious abuses of sustained wrong-doing, wasted resources, environmental destruction, etc. all occur in coercive systems, including regulatory systems which limit choice.
In modern, dynamic, complex socioeconomic systems, everything is always evolving. The equilibrium is always adjusting.
There are fewer and fewer stable designs of durability. With such evolving dynamism, Hayek's problem of knowledge comes to the fore. Which system do you want to solve that equation, one focused on meeting the needs of others in a cooperative and free way, or the one which unilaterally imposes choices made by the select?
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment