06-05-2016, 04:37 AM
(06-05-2016, 03:10 AM)Galen Wrote:(06-05-2016, 03:05 AM)Eric the Obtuse Wrote:(06-05-2016, 03:03 AM)Galen Wrote:(06-05-2016, 02:59 AM)Eric the Obtuse Wrote:(06-05-2016, 02:57 AM)Galen Wrote: Here we have the sanest answer of them all. That is the thing about voting for a ruler. You lose no matter which one you choose.
Consider the words of one of the great wits of the twentieth century:
“The major problem—one of the major problems, for there are several—one of the many major problems with governing people is that of whom you get to do it; or rather of who manages to get people to let them do it to them.
To summarize: it is a well-known fact that those people who must want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it.
To summarize the summary: anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job.”
― Douglas Adams, The Restaurant at the End of the Universe
But the job must be done, and government must happen.
No it doesn't. If people were as incapable as you think then humanity would have disappeared of the face of the earth long ago.
You think people are incapable of running a state. How then can you be confident they can run a market? There, I turned your hero on his head fer ya.
A market, indeed a market economy, is the sum of the voluntary interactions of the individuals involved. It is a self-organizing system that no individual or group of individuals could run. That is the lesson of Mises.
"Free" markets could determine that slave families could be broken up strictly for rational decisions of masters.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated Communist but instead the people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists -- Hannah Arendt.