The India To Dream About

Utopians usually dream of a Perfect Society. This is an impossible dream because human beings are imperfect. Because of these imperfections - many are thieves and murderers - we have the institution of government or State to use compulsion and force on such people, so as to prevent them from harming the good people. Yet, even this minimalist government or State can never be perfect, because it too will be composed of imperfect human beings. This realisation should call for a sober assessment on what can be accomplished through the agency of the State.

Classical liberals like Ludwig von Mises were quite clearly against any kind of anarchism. They thought anarchists commit the error of imagining society to be composed entirely of good people. To Mises, government was necessary in order to force the bad people into submission, while leaving the good people alone. They thought that all constitutions were meant to control those who wielded these powers, for if they run amok, society would disintegrate. There would be tyranny. Bad people would take over the government.

Thus, classical liberals were not against government per se; what they were against is any increase in the role and powers of government. The economics of Ludwig von Mises clearly established that governments have NO ROLE to play in economic affairs. Mises opposed every manner of interventionism; he opposed inflationism, fiat currency and central banking; he opposed trade unionism and immigration restrictions too. His ideal was the "unhampered market economy." The government was just supposed to be the "nightwatchman," performing an essential role, but a strictly limited role; limited, that is, by constitutional law.

Adam Smith was no different. His "three duties of the Sovereign" do not include any role in economic and commercial matters; not even the production of money. To Adam Smith, only three things were necessary to make a society flourish:

Peace
Easy taxation
And a tolerable administration of Justice

In Independent India, the founding fathers made the colossal error of expecting too little from people, and too much from The State. They called it "socialism" but this philosophy is actually "anti-social." It involves the Worship of The State. The nightwatchman is seen to be the Planner of the Economy, the Universal Teacher, the Universal Provider. It is such thinking that has destroyed both society as well as government in free India. It is not unsurprising, therefore, that many bright youth favour the complete abolition of this State. I myself have often called for a Second Republic - a new Constitution that strictly limits the scope of State action, including taxation, and thereby ensures Liberty to all the good people who wish to survive through exchanges in a Free Market.

But do note that neither society nor government would be prefect in such a setting. There would be thieves and murderers who might escape justice. There would be poor people - though there wouldn't be "mass poverty" as at present. There would be decadence and vice. There would definitely be business failures and bankruptcies. Yet, there would be much more of pure Profit, and very little Corruption.

But the good thing is that there would be no bullies pushing us around. There would be Liberty. There would be a Civilisation that would progress endlessly. That is the India we ought to dream about.