...[A]pparently he thinks that if the free market is not directed by a goal -- the visible hand of government, I assume -- then it won't work for the common good. Can he really be that ignorant of the work of such economists as Adam Smith, Frederic Bastiat, and those he himself mentions, Mises and Hayek? These men did nothing if not demonstrate that the self-regulating market process yields general social benefits, the common good if you will, without having an overarching goal or intention. When governments have tried to impose a goal on the political-economic system, the effort has always come to grief.
The historical record backs up the economists. Although the market has never been allowed to operate free of mercantilist privilege and other sorts of government intervention, it would be hard to dispute that societies which became substantially market-oriented achieved a general prosperity unprecedented in history.
Oh, darn it. I was thinking Sharon Harris was talking about this too, but she was talking about Michael Kinsley. I still want you to see the links in her article, though. Or, I guess they're scattered throughout the most recent issue of The Liberator Online, which is where you and up when you click that last link.
No time, but here are two I really liked, Myths of Individualism, and The Invisible Hand is a Gentle Hand.
No comments:
Post a Comment