I'm trying not to veer too far into another discussion altogether, but I need to expound on this at least a little:
More to the point: should it alarm people because government control of business is alarming, or because fascism is alarming?
I would say both: I do believe that government control of business is alarming in and of itself, but I also believe that it's alarming as an indication that we're taking one more step on a path towards a form of government and a level of government control that is the antithesis of what America was founded to create, and that Americans have lived under for a bit over two centuries. Moreover, the end of that road is a form of government that promotes war and strife, and that destroys the rights, the choice, and the prosperity of all its citizens.
We're already involved in "endless" wars overseas that are supposed to make us safer and more secure against a nebulous and ill-defined threat. Nationalism and blind loyalty to those in charge, no matter where they may lead, has largely supplanted true patriotism and the questioning of authority. These things go hand in hand with the economic implications of ever-increasing government power as the major features of fascism, and once they're in place, it's simple for the government to claim any further powers they wish in the name of protecting us. All it takes is for someone at the top to push hard enough, evoke enough public fear, and we could become a dictatorship in all but name.
As an example of why I think government control of business itself is alarming, what happens if people still aren't purchasing GM cars, now that the government has a financial and ideological stake in saving the company? Do they force people to buy them anyway by placing tariffs on foreign cars so high that no one will want them? Then we have a choice between an inferior product at a price no one wanted to pay in the first place, and a product people want at a price no one will pay. How does that serve anyone but the people running GM and the government bureaucrats who can point to GM's sales and say "See? We saved the company." They could lower the price of the cars, since the government is footing the bill, but the difference has to come from somewhere - we'd still be paying for them out of our taxes, and still be stuck with an inferior product. GM has no incentive to produce better products, because we'll be paying for them no matter what they put out.
In the end, this only leads to a less prosperous, less satisfied general population and a more prosperous, more satisfied group of managers at GM, who now have to do less because they can be assured that the government won't let them fail. This only leads to less innovation, less progress and less money to go around, since people are less likely to invest in new and potentially profitable alternatives when the government has a stake in ensuring that the existing players continue to dominate the market.
More to the point: should it alarm people because government control of business is alarming, or because fascism is alarming?
I would say both: I do believe that government control of business is alarming in and of itself, but I also believe that it's alarming as an indication that we're taking one more step on a path towards a form of government and a level of government control that is the antithesis of what America was founded to create, and that Americans have lived under for a bit over two centuries. Moreover, the end of that road is a form of government that promotes war and strife, and that destroys the rights, the choice, and the prosperity of all its citizens.
We're already involved in "endless" wars overseas that are supposed to make us safer and more secure against a nebulous and ill-defined threat. Nationalism and blind loyalty to those in charge, no matter where they may lead, has largely supplanted true patriotism and the questioning of authority. These things go hand in hand with the economic implications of ever-increasing government power as the major features of fascism, and once they're in place, it's simple for the government to claim any further powers they wish in the name of protecting us. All it takes is for someone at the top to push hard enough, evoke enough public fear, and we could become a dictatorship in all but name.
As an example of why I think government control of business itself is alarming, what happens if people still aren't purchasing GM cars, now that the government has a financial and ideological stake in saving the company? Do they force people to buy them anyway by placing tariffs on foreign cars so high that no one will want them? Then we have a choice between an inferior product at a price no one wanted to pay in the first place, and a product people want at a price no one will pay. How does that serve anyone but the people running GM and the government bureaucrats who can point to GM's sales and say "See? We saved the company." They could lower the price of the cars, since the government is footing the bill, but the difference has to come from somewhere - we'd still be paying for them out of our taxes, and still be stuck with an inferior product. GM has no incentive to produce better products, because we'll be paying for them no matter what they put out.
In the end, this only leads to a less prosperous, less satisfied general population and a more prosperous, more satisfied group of managers at GM, who now have to do less because they can be assured that the government won't let them fail. This only leads to less innovation, less progress and less money to go around, since people are less likely to invest in new and potentially profitable alternatives when the government has a stake in ensuring that the existing players continue to dominate the market.
Reply
Leave a comment