Our Poison’d Chalice
by
Michael S. Rozeff
by Michael S. Rozeff
DIGG THIS
Jefferson thought
Napoleon "a ruthless tyrant, drenching Europe in blood..."
The history books recount the stories of any number of merciless
men of power. Clive Foss has a
book on the 50 most ruthless tyrants, figures like Pol Pot,
Napoleon, Caesar, Tamerlane, Idi Amin, Nero, Stalin, Hitler, and
Mao Zedung. Readers can, if they wish, find replacements. Apologists
for state power can excuse these sadistic killers, wish they had
been even more savage, count them as exceptions, worship them as
heroes, or place them on statist pedestals.
It is easy
to understand that the human being in possession of too much power
over a people is a very large time bomb waiting to go off. The big
bombs that have already gone off are easy to spot. In a way, this
is too bad. It takes our eyes off the explosive, which is not the
particular detonator, not the tyrant, but the tyrant’s power.
There are two
ways to prevent tyrants from gaining explosive power. The first
method is to have a handbook that tells us how to identify an incipient
tyrant so that we can stop him or her early while he is building
his bomb. In some cases, the evil one announces his intentions.
Some are devious enough to play a part and fool people. Others offer
themselves up as saviors. Yet others engineer a rise to power by
all sorts of means. If there were such a handbook or such knowledge,
wouldn’t we have known about it in the twentieth century? Yet many
of the worst tyrants lie within memory.
The second
method is to have (a) law and (b) government that do not allow concentrated
power in the first place, and (c) place everyone under that law.
The law itself should limit the power that any man or group of men
can have.
If we understood
what that law was and what it meant, then we’d have our handbook
for avoiding tyrants and tyranny. For a tyrant sooner or later must
break one or more of those laws or convince us that we can or should
break them.
The objects
upon which government can lawfully act should therefore be limited.
Government should administer that fixed law, not invent or make
up new law. All those who have governing responsibilities should
be subject to that same law.
There are two
more safeguards to control governing power: voice and exit. Voice
is open speech. Exit includes physical withdrawal from governance
and the ability of those governed to withdraw their support and
financing of their governing agents.
These are necessary
conditions. They are not sufficient because it takes human beings
to control tyranny.
It will be
thought by some, maybe many, that our current law and government
are acceptable, or that we cannot do better or much better than
the U.S. Constitution, or that we are in the process of perfecting
this democracy or whatever one wishes to call this form of political
government that we currently have. There are those who are satisfied
with this big and powerful state of ours, as long as it is more
or less democracy. They think this system is just the ticket to
redeem the human race from its miseries, or that there is no better
alternative. They have a great fondness for the American system
of state. If some other states misbehave in a really dreadful and
obvious manner, like Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union, they chalk
it up to a host of special circumstances. The U.S. is regarded as
different and better.
These comfortable
and self-satisfied attitudes support tyranny. If one wonders how
the average German could have supported Hitler, wonder how the average
American can support our pastiche of unbridled laws. Wonder how
President Bush and his coterie were able to launch a criminal war
in Iraq in full view of all of us and with the unswerving support
of Congress. There are better ways.
The imposition
of tyranny when the power is available is a matter, among other
things, of averages. The batting average for tyranny in U.S. government
is well over 0.500, which no major league batter has ever achieved.
For every Grover Cleveland, there are several Franklin Roosevelts.
For every tax cutter, there are several tax raisers. For every stable-money
man, there are several inflationists. De-regulators, for some reason,
are hardly ever to be found. The U.S. had some periods of relative
peace, as from 1814 to 1860 (the Mexican-American War excepted)
and again from 1865 to 1898. But the list of war makers, also known
as great men or great Presidents, is depressingly long nonetheless.
They have increasingly found ways to finance their wars.
Walter Bagehot
wrote: "You may talk of the tyranny of Nero and Tiberius; but
the real tyranny is the tyranny of your next-door neighbor."
The tyranny of the U.S. state has the support of large segments
of the public. We live under a kind of semi-totalitarian democracy
or semi-fascism. It threatens to become full-blown. We do not see
the tyrant inside each of us. Abraham Lincoln once said, "Nearly
all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man’s character,
give him power." In our paradoxical democracy, the people have
power, far too much power. It shows up in Congress and the Executive
having far too much power. Yet they have far too much power over
the people as well.
The big bad
tyrants take our eyes off the far more common but no less destructive
tyrannies that occur all the time. Thomas Bailey Aldrich wrote:
"The possession of unlimited power will make a despot of almost
any man. There is a possible Nero in the gentlest human creature
that walks." A completely unrestrained democracy is the unlimited
power of a majority of "any man" become despot. It is
a noticeable tyranny. But even a less than completely overbearing
democracy is filled with continual explosive devices going off.
We are used to them and no longer notice.
Wherever there
are states, there are stifling government bureaucracies that suppress
freedom and free exchange. They are surely tyranny. Democracies
are no different in this respect than dictatorships. The reason,
noted earlier, is that voting can take place on just about anything
we decide to vote on. Instead of the law being the law, we are the
law, and we are tyrants. We tyrannize ourselves.
It has been
the case again and again that when states move toward free markets
yes, this can and does happen their economies boom.
This is perhaps some sort of rare event, and maybe that’s why the
outcome is often called an "economic miracle" as if it
were supernatural. This is unfortunate language, because the causes
are perfectly natural and man-made. Tyranny does not bat a thousand,
and the occasional good leadership slips in. When it does, the human
race bounds ahead. West Germany thrived after 1948 because Ludwig
Erhard "abolished the price-fixing and production controls
that had been enacted by the military administration. This exceeded
his authority, but he succeeded with this courageous step."
Deng Xaioping introduced market reforms and stimulated "an
industrial revolution in China." Even Lenin had to introduce
the New Economic Policy to overcome previous state nationalizations
and controls over farm and factory. Within a short time, entrepreneurial
"nepmen" emerged. Placing money and banking on a sound
basis, or at least a sounder basis, is frequently an important step
in these transformations as is avoiding war.
All we need
to do is bring down tyranny’s batting average and we’ll be better
off. This is a tall order because the basic law of the land, the
U.S. Constitution, both as written and as interpreted, allows unlawful
political government, that is, tyranny. It is a tall order because
we too are the tyrants.
The tyranny
we now have is wrapped up in a package regarded as attractive, with
a ribbon that reads DEMOCRACY on it. John Adams said: "Remember,
democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders
itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide."
Adams
was, of course, not quite accurate. Democracy is an abstraction.
We are the democrats in this democracy. We are the ones committing
suicide, whether quickly or by degrees.
"If
it were done when ’tis done, then ’twere well
It were done quickly. If the assassination
Could trammel up the consequence, and catch,
With his surcease, success; that but this blow
Might be the be-all and the end-all here,
But here, upon this bank and shoal of time, –
We’d jump the life to come. But in these cases
We still have judgment here; that we but teach
Bloody instructions, which being taught, return
To plague the inventor: this even-handed justice
Commends the ingredients of our poison’d chalice
To our own lips."
August
13, 2007
Michael
S. Rozeff [send him mail]
is a retired Professor of Finance living in East Amherst, New York.
Copyright
© 2007 LewRockwell.com
Michael
S. Rozeff Archives
|