Michael Lind at Salon.com is wrong. It's very easy to explain why there are no libertarian countries, and it's not the reason he thinks. by Walt Thiessen
Thursday, June 6, 2013
Michael Lind over at Salon.com asked this question in his article published on Tuesday: "If your approach is so great, why hasn’t any country anywhere in the world ever tried it?" In asking this question, he believes he has done something clever.
He's right that there are no libertarian countries and that there have never been any libertarian countries. The closest to a libertarian country that the world has ever seen was the Jefferson era, and even that era doesn't qualify.
What Lind does not understand, however, is why this is true. He thinks it's because ... well, he actually doesn't say why he thinks it hasn't happened. So I thought I'd help him out.
Michael, the reason why there are no libertarian countries is that fiat money undermines liberty. So long as governments have the power to expand money supplies at their will, liberty must lose.
Expansionary money makes socialism look like it works. Expansionary money makes militarism look like a good investment. Expansionary money makes the welfare state seem like a good deal. Expansionary money makes interventionism seem like a good idea. Expansionary money makes protectionism seem like sound economics. Expansionary money makes big government look fabulous.
Take away expansionary money, and socialism fails very quickly. Without expansionary money, militarism cannot thrive. Without expansionary money, the welfare state quickly looks like a drain on society. Without expansionary money, interventionism looks mindlessly stupid. Without expansionary money, protectionism leads almost immediately to economic failure. Without expansionary money, big government looks much more like a threat than a friend to the average person.
You see, Michael, it's all about perception. It's about the smoke-and-mirrors. So long as politicians can continue to use expansionary money to make citizens believe that socialism is constructive, that militarism is strength, that the welfare state is good for us all, that interventionism is security, that protectionism is productive, and that big government is our greatest friend, then there will never be a libertarian country. Liberty and expansionary money are not compatible.
The reason for all this is that expansionary money hides the true cost of lost freedom. It makes lost freedom look like a good deal, because the average person does not connect in their minds the fact that expansionary money directly impoverishes them, that it takes away the value of their savings, that it drains most of the value they earn in their lifetimes.
So long as all that happens, then you're right, Michael. There will never be a libertarian country.
Of course, expansionary money doesn't last forever, and we're in the end game with the current system. And that's reason to pause and rethink expansionary money.
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 4
thumbs so far
The views expressed
in this article are those of Walt Thiessen only and
do not represent the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates.
Walt Thiessen is solely responsible for the contents
of this article and is not an employee or otherwise affiliated
with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.