Austro-Libertarian Natural Order Philosophy From Indyeah

Individualistic Austro-Libertarian Natural Order Philosophy From Indyeah

Tuesday, March 8, 2011

The Bible, A King, And A Mayor

We are faced with a unique situation in India as in many other nations - the collapse of The State. At times like these, there will be many calling for a "strong man" to head the political system - even a King. However, monarchs are NOT what "civil government" is all about. For that, we need mayors in all cities and towns. These mayors must be from the merchant community themselves - that is, they are members of the "bourgeoisie." This is what civil government in a market economy is all about.

First, here is something from the Holy Bible about the dangers of asking for a King. This section is from I Samuel 8, and was often quoted by Thomas Paine, Lord Acton and other classical liberals to illustrate the fact that The State is not divinely inspired:

10. And Samuel told the words of the LORD unto the people that asked of him a king.

11. And he said, This will be the manner of the king that shall reign over you: He will take your sons and appoint them for himself, for his chariots, and to be his horsemen; and some shall run before his chariots.

12. And he will appoint his captains over thousands, and captains over fifties; and will set them to ear his ground, and to reap his harvest, and to make his instruments of war, and instruments of his chariots.

14. And he will take your fields, and your vineyards, and your oliveyards, even the best of them, and give them to his servants.

15. And he will take a tenth of your seed...

17. And he will take a tenth of your sheep, and ye shall be his servants.

Whereas this is what any monarch is all about - war and taxes - mayors are something else. The best example to take is that of the Lord Mayor of the Olde City of London, an institution over 800 years old and still in existence, with all its civic independence intact. If we read the history of how this institution came into existence, we find that it was meant specifically to keep the King OUT of the City. The King of England, till today, cannot enter this old City without the Lord Mayor's permission, nor can his army march through it. When he does enter, invited, the Lord Mayor meets him at the entrance and "surrenders" the Civic Sword, which the King accepts by tapping it on the hilt, and only then enters. That is, this ancient tradition says: I, Lord Mayor of the City of London, Bearer of the Civic Sword, accept you as King.

This civic independence was an important clause of the Magna Carta of 1215 AD, and the then Lord Mayor of London, William Hardel, was on the Committee of Barons entrusted with ensuring that the Charter of Liberties was carried out and, if not, to raise the nation in revolt.

Note that the title "Lord" was never one given the mayor by the King; rather, it was a title given to their mayor by the citizenry. This is also true of the City of York.

The institution of Lord Mayor of London has never been an "office of profit." You did not ever make money by being Lord Mayor; rather, you spent your own money while in office, because you had to hold lavish entertainments exhibiting your grandeur at your own expense. The office was therefore only accepted by the wealthiest merchants of the city - and, over these centuries, it has been very often refused - in which case that candidate was heavily fined!

A good history of this institution can be bought here.

To conclude: As I pointed out in yesterday's post, taxation today, by both central and state governments, is sucking Precious Capital out of all our cities and towns - and sending them to the Central Planners, who are consuming it in "welfare schemes."

If all the cities and towns are to prosper, they must be able to retain their Precious Capital for investment in their own towns - in local roads, footpaths, sewerage, street lighting, etc. All these are Capital investments, and add to the Capital Value of the township.

We need to invert the pyramid - and we need to progress towards modern Capitalism rather than returning to primitive warlordism, which is monarchy.

Kings are thus not the way there. Hans-Hermann Hoppe's Democracy: The God That Failed looks at "traditional monarchies" as superior to modern democracies, but adds that the "natural order" is better still - that is, the natural order is the way of the future. This natural order is found in cities and towns - because of markets. It is in evidence in all cities and towns throughout India. To secure our future on the solid ground of this natural order, independent mayors are what we need. Not kings. And certainly not any "commanders" or "dictators."

No "commands" are to be issued upon businessmen - that is laissez faire. No Legislation is required either - and we inhabit a "private law society."

Here is something from Mises as a final thought on the subject:

History is a struggle between two principles, the peaceful principle, which advances the development of trade, and the militarist-imperialist principle, which interprets human society not as a friendly division of labour but as the forcible repression of some of its members by others.

2 comments:

  1. The Devil's AdvocateMarch 8, 2011 at 1:30 AM

    From what I've been reading about the City of London and its mayor in present times, it would appear that people are rather disillusioned with this institution, which it appears is now no better than a powerful lobby, attempting and often succeeding in influencing state policy regarding banks and so on to their advantage. In fact an article i read on the subject in Outlook magazine claims that little is left of its old glory other than its ceremonial splendour. Don't forget that whatever form of government exists, there will always be people who will try to use it to their advantage. Corruption seems endemic in human nature. What is needed is systems to prevent the corrupt from having power.

    ReplyDelete
  2. @Devil's Advocate: This corruption began shortly after the Glorious Revolution of 1688, when the Bank of England was established, with a monopoly over note issue, with the intent of financing war. Yet, even then, there were many Lord Mayors who were bankers (belonging to the Company of Goldsmiths) who strongly opposed this move. These honest few lost out. This is the reason why the annual ritual of the "testing of the coinage" continues even today - but the Lord Mayor does not attend any more.

    Fortunately, corrupt money cannot last. At least, not for long. The British welfare state funded by fiat paper notes is unworkable - in the long run. Hence, the importance of the City of London as a global financial hub has declined considerably.

    In the market, honesty is always the best policy. The City of London must realise that now.

    ReplyDelete