The best two addresses were given on the final day. Vaclav Klaus with “We are not on the Winning Side” and Swiss journalist and think tanker Gerhard Schwartz, with “New Isms Endangering Liberty” gave incisive but pessimistic analyses of the task before those who want to see prosperity and liberty maintained.
Klaus spoke of how the velvet revolution had faded into a new form of socialism, the genesis of which we should have detected with the popularity of the Club of Rome and the dominance of the intellectuals with their socialist proclivities. He identified nine problems including:
The 1960s liberation when the anchor of long standing traditions including self-reliance was jettisoned.
The human rights ideology developing which is really only a denial of civil rights.
Judicial activism replacing elected politicians’ decisions.
NGO dominance
The rise of public goods and the public sector.
Schwarz developed a comprehensive report on what has gone wrong and in doing so establishes a program and guide for the liberty defence and promotion agenda. The new Isms have piecemeal replaced the more comprehensive plans that communism and national socialism developed. They are championed by different sets of people who are related largely in their hostility to capitalism. He develops his theme through all of the isms starting with religious fundamentalism, one of the few, in its Islamic variety, that is openly anti liberal.
On top of this is centralism. Less obviously there is pragmatism, transparentism and moralism. The first puts resolution of problems as the key even though this often jeopardizes liberty because its “can do” approach is unprincipled. Transparentism means requiring all we do and all we own being subject to public scrutiny, while moralism blames private sector actors, e.g. In finance, for crises and tends to the suppression of views and thoughts because they are “morally wrong”.
He then deals with paternalism and the prevalent “nudge” theory of guiding people to actions that are said to be in their own self-interest. Some legitimate areas for this exist eg where the actions of people might give rise to costs to taxpayers, but the notion has become utterly perverted as in the case of the fight against smokers.
Above all ecologist has taken root in developing the global desolation scenarios of global warming on which the most potent politic-economic engineering have been developed.
Schwartz shows how the isms all strive for some kind of perfection, using for the most part the notions of liberty but allowing this, a la Mordy Bromberg, only where it conforms to their own views. They claim to be above politics and sometimes claim left and right are archaic terms and operate within the system (their success being facilitated by their having marched through the institutions).
One of the key messages Schwartz offers is, “democracy belongs in its proper place, namely wherever decisions are taken on matters affecting everyone and where public goods are involved.” The knowledge that democracy can demand wealth transfers to the unproductive, regulate the productive and reward the agitational intellectuals, thereby creating adverse incentives towards work, savings, investment, etc. and bringing about the death spiral of affluent nations was a dominant concern of many attendees.
Entitlements is an area in which Schwartz does not dwell, though it is clearly an outcome of the moralism and the rights agenda that has fueled the economic crisis we now face (disappointingly, Barro, the last speaker suggested the answer to the forward debts this has created is to raise sales taxes rather than to cut the entitlements).
Clearly the threats to freedom and prosperity coming from hydra-headed sources are as great today, if as they were in 1947 when communism was the key concern. Unlike Communism, which had an ostensible plan for improving well being, our modern opponents wear many different clothes. Like the Communists and fellow travelers, they offer solutions that can appear attractive. But their success is being achieved gradually and their entrenchment all the more strong.
The paternalism of today’s left is such a hypocritical thing. REAL paternalism (and maternalism) are rejected, only to demand the government fill this role – which it cannot do.
The very teenagers that decry the thought of their parents demanding certain behavioural standards in their own home, are the same ones who want to march in the street to demand that governments place even further behavioural restrictions on us all.
The very adults who are out their demanding more and more government control don’t even bother to discipline and train their own children in their own homes.
That’s why I put up those U.S. ‘founding father’ quotes the other day. They recognised the need for different levels of government, starting with the individual (self control), then family, church, community etc. leaving very little for state or national governments to do. (Their conclusion was that only a virtuous people can be really free.)
Ellen of Tasmania
8 Sep 12 at 2:33 pm
This article views developments in the last few decades as negative, but most people see the developments as positive. Nevertheless we progressives still have a long way to go, but I think the Klaus crowd is very much a rapidly shrinking minority.
The steady swing to progressivism is part of the ongoing evolution of mankind toward greater civilisation. Compare today’s attitudes with the rabidly racist pro-slavery, anti-women attitudes of former eras while we were still evolving.
Dinosaurs like Klaus, Bush, and Howard represent the reactionary past. Mankind is moving steadily forward despite setbacks like the breakdown of the Soviets. I think future decades will indeed see the elimination of capitalism, and consign that appalling selfish philosophy to the dustbin of history.
hammygar
8 Sep 12 at 2:47 pm
One of my impressions from the two MPS conferences that I attended (Christchurch 1989 and Sydney 2010) was that the big hitters who came to town didn’t seemto go out of their way to meet young local talent. Of course it may be that I just didn’t see it happening. But a very short time face to face with a leading figure can be a very inspirational and educational experience and the young talents need all the inspiration they can get to lift the next generation.
Poor Old Rafe
8 Sep 12 at 3:31 pm
Yea Ham, we’ll all be working in the people services area for da government. We’ll all be rich. Equally so.
JC
8 Sep 12 at 4:20 pm
I’d love to see the intellectually challenged communist Hamster front the popular political movement tasked with winning public support for the end of capitalism and the mass poverty that would create. As the current Australian government rabble demonstrates, it can be achieved only through lying and deception. You’ll have to abolish democracy, you dumb fuck. Good luck.
Tom
8 Sep 12 at 4:47 pm
Good, I’m glad that’s finally out in the open. I knew you were angling at supporting the Communists but were previously too coy to say so.
Fisky
8 Sep 12 at 4:56 pm
BTW Hammy, on a historical point of order – the person most responsible for the “breakdown of the Soviets” was in fact Lenin followed closely by his successor Stalin. They are the ones who actually usurped workers’ control over the means of production, not the wicked “capitalists”.
Fisky
8 Sep 12 at 4:58 pm
Yep, we all look forward to the Socialist Worker’s Paradise in Oz, Hammy. Like all those other places it was so successful.
DrBeauGan
8 Sep 12 at 5:20 pm
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/opinion/columnists/What+really+means+Tory/6912856/story.html
Ivan Denisovich
8 Sep 12 at 5:48 pm
Hammy is taking the piss………surely?
Obio
8 Sep 12 at 7:53 pm
It’s all there isn’t it:
The moral certainty
The grandiosity
The black and white thinking
The utopian delusion
Viva
8 Sep 12 at 8:22 pm
You forgot the complete and utter stupidity, and the failure to learn from every other time this particularly nasty little experiment got put to the test.
But I forgive you Viva – it’s easy to miss these amongst the other failures.
Winston Smith
8 Sep 12 at 8:55 pm
I thought Viva was being ironic.
As for Hammy, “we progressives still have a long way to go”… I guess 70 million and counting aren’t enough for you.
Gotta break a few eggs to make an omelette.
nilk
8 Sep 12 at 9:50 pm
Given that the left and progressives were responsible for Apartheid, Jim Crow and a litany of other racist laws the statement shows the usual ignorance of history by the modern left.
It should be remembered that without the left there would have been no need for a civil rights movement.
Jack Lacton
8 Sep 12 at 10:16 pm
Hammy
For the record, what do you mean by capitalism?
Do you have in mind an economic system based on private ownership, voluntary exchange and the rule of law, ie a market based economy? Or do you have some other system in mind?
Also, if you wish to see the end of capitalism, what is the economic system that you would like to put in its place?
Johno
8 Sep 12 at 10:31 pm
This is all pretty sad. Has anyone offerred a solution? Or do we all need to go down the spiral until people realise that we are on the wrong path?
Boris
9 Sep 12 at 12:09 am
Hammy, try saying that to someone who actually lived in the Soviet empire someday. I wouldn’t fancy your chances.
Sam Duncan
9 Sep 12 at 12:19 am
Yeh, Sam, but he will say it was wrongly implemented.
Boris
9 Sep 12 at 12:31 am
” I guess 70 million and counting aren’t enough for you.”
Are you talking deaths? Being a tad conservative, aren’t we?
Twodogs
9 Sep 12 at 12:41 am
I think another problem which needs to be included is what might be called political barratry; where a party stirs up conflict for the purpose of extracting some kind of private benefit from it.
Dealing with such people is one day-to-day life if you work as the environmental manager on a major project: whether it be those who claim to represent the environment, or the indegeneous, or concerned local residents, but in fact a seeking some kind of payout, selling out their own side.
The last thing such people would want is for conflicts to be resolved; it cuts off their gravy train. It has been suggested that the Palestinian leadership prolongs the war with Israel in order to steal from the aid.
It appears to me that the Left’s leadership has been overrun with political barratry. If it could be cleared out, I think the honest if misguided remainder would adopt more sensible and responsible viewpoints.
2dogs
9 Sep 12 at 8:26 am
“Are you talking deaths? Being a tad conservative, aren’t we?”
Just a smidge.
nilk
9 Sep 12 at 8:32 am
Barratry
Thanks for that word 2dogs, not being a lawyer I hadn’t heard it before. A quick Wikipedia describes it as a secular word for simony.
Barratry is the Trade Union Party’s environmental policy, roll out the rent-a-crowd a couple on months before an election to the latest environmental Armageddon scare campaign. Stack the judiciary with tame lawyers.
Forester
9 Sep 12 at 9:11 am
The Wilson affair has certainly shown how prevalent it is in the trade union movement.
Tell Thiess to pay up or there’ll be trouble. Then steal the money Thiess pays.
Perhaps the rest of the Left learnt political barratry from the trade union movement.
2dogs
9 Sep 12 at 10:55 am
Nilk, I should have put a smiley face in.
I was agreeing with Viva.
Two dogs, I reckon the Chinese Revolution would easily add another 150 Million deaths to that total. There’s a tale of utter depravity that will be told someday, but the official histories haven’t been opened yet. The door is ajar, just a little, so we can take a glimpse into a collectivist Hell.
Winston Smith
9 Sep 12 at 12:11 pm
Forester, I first heard the word on “The Hunt For Red October” It was explained by one of the protagonists that mutiny was when the enlisted men overthrew the Authority – the Officers. Barratry was when the Officers (the authorities) refused orders from their superiors by defecting.
In relation to the Trades Unions Parties, the Leadership all the way to the top have revolted against the members. In my non legal opinion, this makes Barratry not quite the right word.
Buggered if I know what the right word is.
Putsch?
Winston Smith
9 Sep 12 at 12:19 pm
Having been thinking about this overnight. But it is not all one way. Think of Reagan/Thatacher/Hawk/Keating reforms. Or free trade.
Boris
9 Sep 12 at 2:37 pm
Are there going to be videos of the speakers on youtube or something?
mundi
9 Sep 12 at 3:24 pm
Mundi
Not sure about speeches being u tubed but they are all or will be on the site.
As to the question “what is to be done” raised by Boris and others, I have no ideas other than proceeding along current paths in influencing a wider population and more fully convincing the political class. Difficult process when most people are concerned simply with living their own lives and the politically active are mainly seeking to direct those lives
Alan Moran
9 Sep 12 at 3:45 pm
Growth in the size of the public sector started to temper in the 1980s. The size of the public sector shrank as a percentage of GDP even in sweden. this was because the deadweight losses of taxes, transfers and regulation limit inefficient policies.
The studies starting from Peltzman showed that government grew in line with the growth in the size and homogeneity of the middle class that was organised and politically articulate enough to implementing a version of Director’s law. most of that growth in the public sector was from the 1950s to the 1970s.
After the 1970s stagflations, the taxed, regulated and subsidised groups had an increasing incentive to converge on new lower cost modes of redistribution.
Reforms ensued led by parties on the left and right with some members of existing political groupings benefiting from joining new coalitions. More efficient taxes, more efficient spending, more efficient regulation and a more efficient state sector reduced the burden on the taxed groups. Most subsidised groups benefited as well because their needs were met in ways that provoked less opposition.
The long term regulatory and budgetary trends are consistent with growth in the political power of the subsidized – especially the elderly. There will be more seniors in the future. Their voting power will count for more than any of the Isms past or present. Why has the political influence of the elderly grown?
see http://home.uchicago.edu/~cbm4/account.pdf for a paper by gary becker on the growth of government
Jim Rose
9 Sep 12 at 3:50 pm
OMG – the sackings in our public sector continue unabated in Australia and mean the department of public works is an office with three people in it,the sandstone stocks for the repair of our historic buildings has been flogged off and no-one in government actually knows how to build a road anymore. You cant get any assistance from whats left of government services because the old notions of governments being there to assist the private sector have been clubbed to death by
shrink the government myopics and nowadays government services have been transformed into products for sale.
Oh and you MUST stay on hold or email to speak to the pathetic batch of overworked people who remain in the public sector.
Yet the sackings continue.
Some people have lost their minds and want the rest of us to live with their vision of greed, disorder and chaos.
Alice
9 Sep 12 at 4:24 pm
Winston, barratry has a different meaning in naval law to the common law meaning, which is where the word is most commonly used.
I was using it to apply to any quarrel, not just a lawsuit. Hence, political barratry.
2dogs
9 Sep 12 at 4:53 pm
Also, I just noticed that John Quiggan made reference to the similar concepts of “maintenance and champerty” on his blog recently.
And the disgusting cretin actually spoke highly of such practices.
If the Left worship such lowlifes, it is no wonder they are overrun with them.
2dogs
9 Sep 12 at 5:48 pm
2dogs perhaps enjoys Campbell Newman;s attempt to flog about twenty publicly owned building assets in QLD to the developer of one single tower who no doubt will give hime a digger or two worth of dopnations
oh go away shrink the government fools (who specialise is dud deals for a back hander)…
rotten little traitors the lot of you.
” Campbell Newman is now proposing to build a brand-new office tower in the Brisbane CBD, to be financed by the sale of up to 20 other buildings including heritage assets. “
Alice
9 Sep 12 at 8:20 pm
barratry, maintenance and champerty stop second-hand markets in tort claims
The English basis for the prohibition is:
(i) discouraging speculation, which is thought to promote frivolous litigation;
(ii) the personal nature relationship view of lawsuits;
(iii) protecting the weaker parts of society from being abused through the legal system; and
(iv) preventing the rich and powerful from using the legal system for vendettas.
Jim Rose
9 Sep 12 at 8:27 pm
Speculation rules the globe now. The speculators have their computers now hooked into the ASX and other stock exchange computers and they speculate in the first few seconds of every days trade with their alogorithms they know well before anyone else the mood, the insider info.
Think you can beat them? Ha. Speculation rules our world now because no-one has the guts to say no to the fat financial sector or to say no to the fat financial sector distrting the information on markets. Central banks control economic policy for the ill of mankind and the financial sector controls governments for the ill of mankind and there isnt a man or a group of men out there with the courage to stop the pillage.
The law wont help. Barratry wont help.
Alice
9 Sep 12 at 8:37 pm
Alice, why don’t you where I came from: USSR and enjoy the lack of greed and speculation? Oops, it is no longer there. How about North Korea?
Boris
9 Sep 12 at 11:45 pm
You are fighting the long dead ghosts of the past Boris and are blind to the real enemies of your freedom and liberty now.
Me? I take a pragmatic approach.
Personally Id like to get home from work earlier and not be imprisoned in gridlocked traffic but it seems your type has some violently emetic reaction to the government actually building infrastructure. As a consequence its my liberty and free time you are stuffing up.
Alice
10 Sep 12 at 8:41 am
2dogs I suggest you learn to read before attempting writing.
John Quiggin
11 Sep 12 at 1:47 pm