Are People Afraid to be Free? I.

 "The truth is, all might be free, if they valued freedom and defended it as they ought."
- Sam Adams


I think that most people in modern, Western society are afraid to be free.  Sure, there are some things they want to be free in, such as being able to choose the type and size of the LCD television, or satellite channels, cell phone texting plan and so forth, minor details really when compared to the larger things where we are not free or at least hampered greatly due to government theft or red tape - education (k-higher ed), employment, health care. So what we are doing (at least, in the States) is slowly handing over choices over what one would think are more important parts of our lives while retaining the more trivial things.  By doing this we demonstrate that what really matters to us is not freedom but prosperity. 

And now that prosperity is everywhere with us we have little (practical) reason to value freedom.  So we see this in the political theatrical displays that are taking place nonstop in your local state capital or Washington and we see it in the way the populace votes.  Usually, just by virtue of voting for a major candidate at the state or federal level, one is voting for someone who supports more government intervention and some kind of socialism.  Of course, they won't say that outright - such and such a candidate might say they're against such things (but that's because they're a candidate and they need your vote.).  They might say they're against the growth of government etc etc. but what they really mean is that they want it to grow slower than the other guys wants it to grow (How's that for conviction!). 

And so I argue that people are indeed afraid to be free.  No matter how many proofs are given them, no matter how appealing liberty may be to it's small group of supporters, most do not want to be free.  Most do not want to be responsible for their choices.  Most are ok with handing over their tax dollars and choices to state and federal agencies; it is after all relatively painless.

Those of us who are thinking to themselves, "That's not me, I really do value liberty..."  That person needs to understand that social change in the direction of more liberty does not happen from the top down, that is due to government laws or politicians.  Change first happen at the individual level, and then in the local community.  If you seek a more free world, become free yourself by avoiding any and all addiction to government aid, then support a healthy community - that might be through running a business, volunteering at a soup kitchen, growing a garden, being a good neighbor etc.  It will be slow, it will take a long time but that is what must happen. 

Confused about the crisis?

I recently listened to an EconTalk podcast where Russ Roberts gives a monologue on what he has learned over the past two years.  It was eye-opening to say the least.

For anyone who is interested in learning about what happened and some reasons why, I strongly recommend setting aside an hour and a half of your time to listen to the podcast. 

I recommend listening to EconTalk regularly, but if you don't this particular podcast is well worth it.

Are People Afraid to be Free? II.

I just finished reading an essay I highly recommend by James Buchanan, "Afraid to be free: dependency as desideratum".  In it, Buchanan makes this argument:

This argument can be succinctly summarized. If we loosely describe socialism
in terms of the range and scope of collectivized controls over individual
liberty of actions, then “socialism” will survive and be extended. This result
will emerge not because collectivization is judged to be more efficient, in
some meaningful economic sense, or even because collectivization more adequately
meets agreed upon criteria for distributive justice, but rather because
only under the aegis of collective control, under “the state”, can individuals
escape, evade and even deny personal responsibilities. In short, persons
are afraid to be free. As subsequent discussion will suggest, socialism, as
a coherent ideology, has lost most of its appeal. But in a broader and more
comprehensive historical perspective, during the course of two centuries, the
state has replaced God as the father-mother of last resort, and persons will
demand that this protectorate role be satisfied and amplified.

 Buchanan is not a Christian, but he nonetheless makes an astute observation about people placing their faith in government instead of God.  Later in the essay he goes on to say that we needn't place our faith in neither, but rather just in the free market.   But I would argue that one still cannot have a free market without a free people.  And people are truly free if they have been set free by Jesus the King.  So God must first be King of a people, then they will be fully capable of using a free market and enjoying it's many benefits.

That said, Buchanan still makes some very good points in the essay.  Unfortunately, he concludes that socialism will grow in the 21st century because people are essentially afraid to be free.  There are four different kinds of socialism that he identifies:

Managerial - "This is the form of socialism that is now dead and buried, both in ideas and in practice."  It is defined as government ownership and control of the means of production.  Some parts of our economy and perhaps others soon will be "managed" though, such as the school system. 
Paternalistic - This is the kind of socialism that stems of "self-anointed elites" who think that " 'only by collectivization can the choices and actions of the masses be directed toward those patterns that "should be wanted if these masses only knew what was in their own best interest'...
Distributionist Socialism - The kind that is behind all types of welfare programs or otherwise distributive agencies, trying to "equalize" the statuses of everyone. 
Parental Socialism - "the attitudes of persons who seek to have values imposed upon them by other persons..."

Buchanan ultimately argues that parental socialism, the most popular (even if not called that name by its proponents) will lead the way to increased government intervention this century.  This is due to belief in God falling by the wayside in the West, mostly in Europe and beginning in the States, as well as the inability for people to believe in an abstract market process as making things well. 

I think Buchanan is right.  It is extraordinarily difficult for people to believe in an abstract market process, especially if they have been taught their whole life not to but to trust the government instead.  And people will not believe in God if he is only a God of last resort.  Fact is, He is a God of first resort, the Christians great joy and reason for living. 

As Jesus said, fear the one who has power over your soul.  Socialism can and will be deadly and our government will continue to wreak havoc in ours and other countries.  But the answer is not to support candidates who purport to oppose such ridiculous activity.  The answer is to worship God in Spirit and in Truth and to spread the good news to the world.