This Cardinal Is In Serious Error

A few weeks ago, I welcomed Pope Benedict's call, delivered at the German parliament, for a public debate on positivism. 


Well, today, it seems that the first shot has been fired from within the Vatican itself, with Cardinal Turkson, President of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace releasing a document titled “Towards reforming the international financial and monetary systems in the context of the global public authority." This document - which is not a "papal document" - opposes a priorism in Economics, espouses empiricism and positivism, and since these are both "intellectual covers for socialism" - as Hans-Hermann Hoppe has written - the document ends up with all the grave errors of socialism, to the extent of calling for a global central bank.


But the Cardinal begins with some half-truths - half-truths that have prompted one commentator to call this document "Right diagnosis, deadly cure." After the diagnosis, the Cardinal asks the question:

What has driven the world in such a problematic direction for its economy and also for peace?

And his first answer is this:

First and foremost, an economic liberalism that spurns rules and controls. Economic liberalism is a theoretical system of thought, a form of “economic apriorism” that purports to derive laws for how markets function from theory, these being laws of capitalistic development, while exaggerating certain aspects of markets. An economic system of thought that sets down a priori the laws of market functioning and economic development, without measuring them against reality, runs the risk of becoming an instrument subordinated to the interests of the countries that effectively enjoy a position of economic and financial advantage. 

This is an issue concerning epistemology. The question is: Does Economics have to follow the method of physics - which is measurement, after which theories are arrived at a posteriori. Or are the Laws of Economics arrived at a priori, by deduction, and are established by logic, just like the propositions of mathematics or geometry, such that they do not need measurement and observation to validate them?


Let us take an example:


The Law of Exchange - which says that when a good is traded voluntarily, both parties gain by the trade; that their individual valuations of that good are unequal. Obviously, if I prefer beer over money, the barowner prefers money over beer. How does such a law require "measurement" or "observation" to validate it? Obviously, this law is NOT going to be established a posteriori. It is true a priori. 


In fact, "value" cannot be measured, for it lies within the valuing mind. "Value is subjective." All that can be measured are prices and quantities - and the price at which exchange transpires will show agreement, not unequal valuation. The "demand-and-supply curves" type of education teaches nonsense - and these curves can only be produced by "measurement." The curves are actually "statistics."  They are thus History - they are not Theory, which in Economics must be true a priori.


Hence, the methods of physics are NOT applicable to the Science of Economics. Positivism and empiricism are the intellectual covers for socialism and interventionism, since they deny the MIND of the acting individual, and they create the false impression of a "national economy" - with its "national income" and its "growth rate" - which must be managed by a super-human mind: that of the central planner; that of the Great Leader. 


Thus, Hans-Hermann Hoppe concludes his brief essay against empiricism with these words:

If we want to attack socialism, we must also attack the absurd intellectual error of empiricism. And if we want to defeat socialism, we must make a principled Misesian case based on the logic of human action and the irrefutable laws of economics.

Since Cardinal Turkson, President of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace,  espouses empiricism and disavows a priorism, he is led deep into socialism, statism, and even the "primacy of politics."


Here are some quotes from the rest of the document:

...the world’s peoples ought to adopt an ethic of solidarity as the animating core of their action... [But we are all individuals, and we buy and sell in markets full of strangers. See my article on "catallaxy."]

the risk of an “idolatry of the market..." [The real risk is idolatry of the State and political authority. See also Tom Woods' rejoinder here.]

global social justice seem most urgent... for achieving... a fair distribution of world wealth... [The "mirage of social justice" gone global!]

one can see an emerging requirement for a body that will carry out the functions of a kind of “central world bank” [Horrors!]

strengthening the existing institutions, such as the European Central Bank [Here is a report that Germany will ditch the Euro if the ECB starts printing more of them.]

In this process, the primacy of the spiritual and of ethics needs to be restored and, with them, the primacy of politics – which is responsible for the common good – over the economy and finance. [Read Anthony de Jasay's Before Resorting to Politics.]

forms of recapitalization of banks with public funds making the support conditional on “virtuous” behaviours aimed at developing the “real economy” [Moral hazard.]

At this point, I would like to remind the Cardinal of his views on the Principle of Subsidiarity, which he upholds, and defines as follows:

According to the logic of subsidiarity, the higher Authority offers its subsidium, that is, its aid, only when individual, social or financial actors are intrinsically deficient in capacity, or cannot manage by themselves to do what is required of them.

Now, money has ALWAYS been "private money": GOLD. Accordingly, we human beings, in freedom, without the aid of any political authority, can manage to produce our own money. Free banking can be conducted under traditional commercial law - as Jesus Huerta de Soto has shown. Thus, according to a Principle upheld by the Church, and also by Cardinal Turkson, there is NO NEED for ANY POLITICAL AUTHORITY over money and banking, and certainly not at the global level.


This is NOT new - not "neo-liberalism." This is "classical liberalism." Adam Smith's "Three Duties of the Sovereign" did NOT include anything to do with money. I have recounted these three duties here.


Mises put it best, in Human Action, when he wrote:

The use of money in a market economy is a praxeologically necessary fact. That gold, and not something else, is used as money is merely a historical fact and as such cannot be conceived by catallactics.

Thus, we Hindus are currently celebrating Diwali - when we traditionally buy gold. It is a "custom" - from History. This has NOTHING to do with "theory."

As far as "world order" is concerned, Mises also put it best when he wrote, in Nation, State, and Economy:

Liberalism, which demands full freedom of the economy, seeks to dissolve the difficulties that the diversity of political arrangements pits against the development of trade by separating the economy from the state. It strives for the greatest possible unification of law, in the last analysis for world unity of law. But it does not believe that to reach this goal, great empires or even a world empire must be created.

I also recommend to my reader this Islamic Judgment on Paper Money - which shows very clear reasoning.

But recall where I began unraveling this litany of errors - with Cardinal Turkson's empiricism, his antipathy to a priorism, and his love for "measurement" in Economics. On the subject of epistemology, I earnestly recommend Hans-Hermann Hoppe's Economic Science and the Austrian Method, which you can find here.


Professor Hoppe's article "Why the State demands Control of Money" is also a very useful read in today's times.

The Fascist Threat Is Real - And Everywhere: Part - 2

In yesterday's post, the first of this series, I discussed Lew Rockwell's speech on the growth of fascism worldwide, and provided my reader with the 8 points he outlined as the signs of this ideology. I also said why India has turned fascist - because Gandhi and Nehru were wrong.


Today, let me begin by quoting Lew again, on why fascism is "invisible":

"It is true that fascism has no overarching theoretical apparatus. There is no grand theorist like Marx. That makes it no less real and distinct as a social, economic, and political system. Fascism also thrives as a distinct style of social and economic management. And it is as much or more of a threat to civilization than full-blown socialism.

This is because its traits are so much a part of life — and have been for so long — that they are nearly invisible to us.

If fascism is invisible to us, it is truly the silent killer. It fastens a huge, violent, lumbering state on the free market that drains its capital and productivity like a deadly parasite on a host. This is why the fascist state has been called the vampire economy. It sucks the economic life out of a nation and brings about a slow death of a once-thriving economy."

We now see why India's "Vampire State" is essentially Fascist - because it stands for NO CLEAR IDEOLOGY. It is a little Gandhian, a little "socialist," a little "capitalist" - a little bit of everything. However, when trade unions as well as syndicates of capitalists combine with the State - then this is what we call "corporatism," which is nothing but fascism. In a free market economy, there is no "producers' policy" - and the consumer is always the king.

Now, politics without any clear ideology cannot be "democratic." A political party must be based on CLEAR IDEAS. We do not find this anywhere in the world today - and certainly not in India. In our country, the Representation of People Act says all political parties must swear by "socialism" - but are the BJP and the Shiv Sena "socialist"? All that is intended by the legislation is that pro-market parties be kept out. The voter loses choice. And "politics" is bereft of those with a clear ideology - a "world view." Their "voice" is not heard. The "battle of ideas" which is democracy does not happen - at least not in India. 

Not that there is much hope in democracy. In the USSA, which is definitely a corporatist State, what with the nationalisation of General Motors, the Republicans and the Democrats are much the same. There is not much difference between George W Bush and Barack Obama on war, on the Fed, and on foreign policy. Ron Paul sticks out like a loner - and do recall that Bastiat's biography is tiled A Man Alone. Ron Paul stands like that. All we can do is hope and pray that he wins.

Similarly, in the UK, where the "mother of all parliaments" sits, they have just announced another round of "quantitative easing" - a pseudonym for printing paper money. Disaster looms. But the last round was under Labour! Corporatism in the UK?

In my "Austrian" view, there is NO REASON why a few people should not go bankrupt. That is far better than inflating a whole nation - and then, the whole world. In a free market, no one can be insured against bankruptcy. And, anyway, that is surely NOT the "role of the State." Repudiation of the "national debt" is the Austrian solution - not "austerity."

But then, the question remains: Why is democratic politics all over the world devoid of clear ideologies, devoid of clear principles? The answer must lie in State education - which has sowed the seeds of confusion in the minds of the people, who are the voters. Yesterday, I suggested an uprising against the RBI. Today, let me suggest another against the Ministry of Education. 

Indian democracy is really peculiar in that there is NO DEBATE. Sonia is quiet, Rahul seldom speaks, chamcha manmohan is always silent, and the opposition - if we can call them that - never take up vital issues. They just play the fool - in parliament and out of it. And as for the TV channels... I would call them "yellow journalism."

In India, officially a "socialist" nation, with a democracy restricted to socialists, our biggest mistake as parents has been to agree to State Education. For twenty years, the Market has proven its efficacy - but the "ideology" of this Market, this "world view," is unable to penetrate the syllabii of schools and colleges. Under these circumstances, voters will remain as confused as the politics. All these so-called political parties will go on with this fascistic system masquerading as democracy, and as a welfare state.

Wake up and smell the Fascism, dudes!

This is a Vampire State, and a Vampire Economy. That is what inflationism is all about. This is the "Reverse Robin Hood" at work. We must wake up the masses to their plight.

Say's Law: A Summing Up

Say's Law of Markets, by making a distinction between those who compete with us and those who do not, tells us that the bulk of the market is made up of those who co-operate with us; that too, in two ways: first, by providing us with our needs, the goods and services we do not and cannot produce ourselves; and second, by providing the vital demand for the goods and services we come to the market to sell. 

The market is NOT "pitiless competition." There is more co-operation than competition - and, anyway, "competition is liberty, while the absence of competition is tyranny." There is no "Social Darwinism" in the market.

This is SOCIETY. 

This is the market society built on the principle of the DIVISION OF LABOUR, which is specialisation. This is the polar opposite of Gandhian "self-sufficiency.


Say's Law of Markets thus proves what Thomas Paine wrote in the very first paragraph of Common Sense - that "society is a patron, while government is a punisher." Society is the vast majority, and they are in the market; government is a small minority, set up to apprehend, try, and punish enemies of this market order, who are an even smaller minority. 

This is the "natural order."

To socialists, Society, State and Party are all ONE: "India is Indira." Say's Law proves this vision dead wrong.


Say's Law also tells us much about taxation - that any tax reduces demand. It suggests a minimalist State; it suggests "political economy." Giving taxes to the State hurts market demand for all. Say's Law proves many genuine experts in public finance right when they write that modern taxation is more expropriation - and that indirect taxation, including customs duties, as well as the income tax, should be outlawed by constitution. Say's Law suggests "user fees" ought to replace taxes, wherever possible.


Say's Law can also be used to analyse the effects of interventionism - the key question being how interventionism in one area will hurt non-competing industries, which is the rest of society, the rest of the market order.


Finally, Say's Law "pours lead into the Keynesian's ear" - as one of my readers put it. It shows that government is a cost, not a source of benefits, not a "stimulus to demand." It points to the real source of market demand - which is the production and sale of goods and services, backed by savings and investment. This is the pathway to civilisation. The Keynesians, with their funny money welfarism, heavy taxation and even heavier borrowing, have unleashed the forces of "de-civilisation" - which is rampant capital consumption. All welfare, it may be pointed out, is consumption; nothing is saved; nothing is invested.


As a wise man put it: "It is good if the people support the government - but all hell breaks loose if the government attempts to support the people."


To conclude: In these five posts on this vital Law of Markets  which is currently mistaught universally (the first post is here), I hope I have shown my reader the correct way to look at markets, at society, and at the State. I hope my reader will realise that Keynesian "macroeconomics" must be jettisoned in toto, and replaced by methodological individualism as the epistemology of the Science of Economics.


Thus, as Sudha Shenoy once put it in an interview with Austrian Economics Newsletter in 2003:

Almost every economics department in the world can be immediately shut down without having any ill-effect on the world of ideas. 

This is the power of Jean Baptiste Say's Law of Markets.

We Don't Get Fooled Again!

A Deutsche Bank report just reached me, warning of recession in the USSA. But their analysis is based on "consumer spending" - and this might suggest to many that another "stimulus" is required from the Fed.

This displays ignorance of Say's Law of Markets.

Last night, I watched a BBC programme called "The World Debate" on the current economic crisis, hosted by Nick Gowing. Of the four debaters, three were government people - Christine Lagarde, who heads the IMF; a guy from Obama's economic team; and a dude from the EU in Brussels.


Lagarde spoke of the need for the G-20 to get together and do what they did last time - and I could have cried out loud. That time the G-20 nations inflated their currencies along with the US Fed, which is what "central bank co-ordination" is all about, and which is why the crisis is so widespread today. Nick Gowing, on his part, asked for "more decisive political leadership."

This, too, displays ignorance of Say's Law of Markets.

Today, the Keynesians teach this law as follows:

Supply creates its own demand.

This incorrect formulation of this vital law makes their students believe that "monetary stimuli" create demand.


So, let us think things through: 


The supply of plasma TVs does not create the demand for plasma TVs. Yet, if cars sell, if jeans sell, if shoes sell, and if beer sells - then, and only then, will some people from these latter industries be tempted to buy a plasma TV. Thus, what Say's Law actually means is:

The sale of X gives rise to the demand for all non-X.

If X sells, it creates the demand for all non-competing goods.

So, if you want increased demand for your plasma TVs, don't go to The State asking for a monetary stimulus. Instead, make sure all those who do not compete with you are selling their stuff.


There is another reason for this: If you ask The State to inject a monetary stimulus, all that will happen is another boom-bust cycle - and inflation. The entire economy will be hurt, including yourself, and including all those who do not compete with you.


On the other hand, if you want those industries that do not compete with you to do well, you will NOT favour loose monetary policies based on the false idea of boosting consumption. Rather, you will realise the importance of SAVING and INVESTMENT. You will realise that these businessmen who do not compete with you will need to save and invest - in order to produce. You will favour "capital accumulation" and despise "capital consumption" - which is Keynesian-welfarism-inflationism. You will champion "sound money."  


That is, you will realise that production of goods and services boosts demand - not the production of money. Indeed, not even the production of gold boosts demand. All that happens then is that the price of gold falls - look at the history of Spain and Portugal when they brought gold and silver back to Europe from South America. Spain and Portugal never got rich. And there was inflation throughout Europe. Britain got rich not by digging for gold and silver - but by trading in nutmeg and pepper, and tea, and opium, and tobacco, and sugar, etc.

Increased production of "funny money" is a VERY BAD IDEA.

Thus, Nick Gowing is WRONG when he asks for "more decisive political leadership." The solution does NOT lie in politics. On the contrary. The solution lies in "private money" - and "free banking under law." 


That is: the size, scope, powers and resources of The State and the politicians must be drastically cut down. Money must be given back to the people - to save and invest, to produce. That is how demand can be permanently boosted and boom-bust cycles avoided forever.


Indeed, the current crisis is BECAUSE OF POLITICS. Central banks and their member banks are collapsing. Politics lies at the root of this crisis.


So, let us NOT GET FOOLED. 


Paper notes are just a "money substitute." This is what the "promise to pay the bearer" indicates. Something "hard" is (and always was) real money - GOLD.


So, as the song goes:

I tip my hat to the New Constitution,

Take a bow for the New Revolution,

Smile and grin at the change all around me,

Pick up my guitar and play,

Just like yesterday,

Then I get on my knees and pray:

WE DON'T GET FOOLED AGAIN!

While that covers widespread miseducation in the USSA, Britain and Germany, let us now turn to our own country.


Did you know that both Amartya Sen and chacha manmohan s gandhi were students of Professor Joan Robinson in Cambridge - who was Keynes' right-hand man, and who made it her "mission to destroy Say's Law"? It was Joan Robinson who cleverly coined the "supply creates its own demand" nonsense.


And, as I wrote the other day:

Without Sound Money - what is the State 

but a band of robbers?

That should take care of Kapil Sibal's "(mis)education."


Let us now turn to Palaniappan Chidambaram, the Central State Police Minister, whose name has cropped up in the 2G scam. There is a report written by the Political Editor of The Sunday Guardian that says that in the Nira Radia tapes, A Raja told Radia that "PC got a lot of money."


The Central State's Police Minister is corrupt?


And he has been police minister since the 1980s - and there have been no police reforms. Policing has just got worse. Now, road deaths total over 2,00,000 per annum - and the police don't even possess the "knowledge" to fix things.


We must ABOLISH THIS STATE. And replace it with honest civic corporations - one in each city and town.


A Second Republic!


A Republic WITHOUT any police - like the England of old, before Peel set up the Bobby. Like India of the Company, before the Crown passed the Indian Police Act in 1861.


TORTS - which are "crimes against the individual" and for which financial compensation must be paid by the tortfeasor to the victim: this will be better than any "criminal justice system." Anyway, ours doesn't work. And the minister is corrupt. Indeed, the Entire System is Corrupt.


So let us vow to throw the whole thing out, beginning with the Central Bank, and ending with the State Police.


Liberty! Property! Justice! The Pursuit of Happiness, Subjectively Defined!

WE DON'T GET FOOLED AGAIN!

(This turned out to be a 5-part series on Say's Law. The next post can be read here.)

Only Liberty And Property, Dudes

I found a strange article - actually a sort of book review - in Mint the other day, with the strange title:

More literacy + More per capita income= More democracy

And the sub-title read:

Whether education promotes democracy or the causality is the other way around, has been the subject of a heated debate, with some economists saying that institutions are the prime engine of growth, while others view human capital as the root cause of economic development

And, at the bottom, was the author, 

Manas Chakravarty's, conclusion:

Developing countries in East Asia, for instance, slowly became more democratic as they became richer. That could hold true for China as well. And for India, the success of the Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan and the concomitant higher levels of literacy, together with higher per capita income, will lead to a more meaningful participation in our democracy.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

Note that the author never mentions the sweet word "Liberty." Nor that other sweet word "Property." We have neither - but we have "democracy." It is democratic legislation that banned 70,000 dancing girls in Bombay - and put some 5,00,000 musicians, bartenders, waiters, bouncers and cooks out of work. It is subordinate legislation that does not permit anyone to open a simple beer bar in Nude Elly. 


Yet, we are told we have The Vote. But you cannot eat The Vote; nor can you feed it to your family. Liberty is what you need - not The Vote.


And as for State Education: There are lots of people who could survive very well without formal education - like dancing girls and musicians.


There are lots of people who know something valuable that no formal education can teach them - like the tribals who "know" how to distil mahua from a jungle flower of the same name. They need Liberty.


Democracy is "the god that failed" - and this is clear when we look at Europe and the USSA today. With a "time preference" of just five years, democratic rulers "loot and scoot." Lord Keynes has given them the ability to do so even better. And their "education" (and their "intellectuals") have just endorsed Keynesian and socialist myths. 


If you read Hoppe's book, you will find a clear demonstration of the fact that "traditional monarchies" were better than democracy - because then, the ruler was "under the law," the people had liberty as well as property, and the ruler's time horizon was limitless, because his son would take over after he died, and so he had the desire to keep on increasing the capital value of his State. 


Under democracy, all we have, internationally, is "capital consumption" - which is the road to "de-civilisation." Just wait a few months, and you will realise how The Vote has destroyed the world. Especially "western civilisation." 


Destroyed.


Apart from Liberty, people need the inviolable right to Property - because this unlocks the "mystery of capital." As Hernando de Soto has shown, through field  studies all over the Third World, from Bangladesh to Egypt, poor people own property in these "poor nations" - property worth trillions - but possess no "titles." This bars them from Capitalism. They remain poor - forever. They live in shantytowns.


The sort of book that Manas Chakravarty has reviewed for his column is a good example of the kind of "empirical research" the subject of Economics does NOT need. There is no theoretical proposition in this subject that can be either established or proved by such research. The theories of Economics are best thought through by the economist in an armchair - and then used to confirm reality in the outside world. 


The Science of Economics consists of "looking out from within the consciousness." The importance of Liberty and Property are embedded within our consciousness. 


It is tragic that a columnist who purports to talk "Simply Economics" loses sight of his objective, gets entangled in pointless "empirical research," and then arrives at conclusions that support the ambitions of our Predatory State. 


So I go beyond what I said the other day:

Our poor people need Liberty and Property - and Nothing Else. 

They do NOT need Welfare.

They do NOT need Miseducation.

They do NOT need The Vote.

PS: The picture above is of John Locke, who wrote, in 1691, "where there is no Property, there is no Justice."

The Poor Need Freedom - Not Education, Nor Welfare

I am extremely pleased to see an old post titled "Shah Rukh Kahn and the Truth" top the list of "popular posts" supplied by Google on the right-hand bar. This post makes it obvious that inflationism is bad for the poor - a point I also made the other day, when I discussed the MGNREGS.


But the question remains: What is best for the poor?


Well, for one, SOUND MONEY.


Apart from that - PROPERTY RIGHTS.


And FREE INTERNATIONAL TRADE - so their consumption can improve.


Fourth - LIBERTY!


I gave the example the other day of the NIGHTLIFE INDUSTRY. Think about it: How did black slaves become "superstars" in America? Because of New Orleans - and jazz. In India, when I watch the talent shows on TV (in regional languages, too) the plain fact emerges that millions and millions of Indians are hugely gifted in song and dance, and in playing musical instruments. But they have no place to play - play "live," that is. This hurts the poorest of them all. The better off ones make do publishing music, and appearing in movies and television. The poor ones go broke. I have personally seen hugely gifted rock and jazz artistes in Delhi broke. Broke as hell. 


Now, let us say there is LIBERTY - and a 24-hour economy. Nightlife. Ganja-charas. Casinos. Nightclubs. 


Obviously, many, many poor people will make money.


Then, they will spend this money - and other businesses will make money.


Then, these businessmen will spend - and the cycle will repeat itself endlessly.


This is Jean-Baptiste Say's "Law of Markets." In a nutshell, it says that if X sells, demand is created for all non-X. 


Do read my column on this important economic law under the title "What Pumps Up An Economy" here.  Jean-Baptiste Say was known as the "Adam Smith of France." Great man. Vital law - of markets.


The poor do NOT need (mis)education from our The State. They know lots of things that school can never teach them - from making idlis to playing the guitar. As Jimmy Page said, "The good thing about the guitar is that they do not teach it at school." Freedom is what the poor need.


And as for welfare - it is phoney. It is funded by "funny money" - which erodes the capital of the poor. End this nonsense.


Liberty!

Miseducation - In Pondicherry

I simply HATE phonies like Amartya Sen who insist that "the poor need education" and then add that this education must be provided by our The State. Amartya Sen NEVER says that the poor need FREEDOM FROM THE STATE.


It is thanks to such phonies that chacha manmohan s gandhi has enacted legislation mandating "Free & Compulsory Education" for all kids in India.


But what is the "content" of this education?


I found out yesterday when a young boy was passing my perch, carrying his very overloaded school bag. I ordered him to show me his school-books. He showed them to me - and they were all published by our The State in Chennai. Why Chennai?


Anyway, I went through a few of these textbooks. The one on "social studies" was awful - with a major part covering "Civics," in which not a word was mentioned as to what Liberty and Property mean to the Citizen.


The section on Economics was just two pages - and it began by saying "agriculture is the oldest occupation in the world." What about "hunting and gathering"? What about "nomadic herdsmen"? The book then went on to say how "Society" is formed when "weavers and farmers depend on each other" - without one word on the "Division of Labour." Finally, it concluded that the study of Economics is extremely valuable, because "only economists can prepare government budgets." At the bottom of these two pages was a colour photo of Amartya Sen with the heading "Great Scholar of Economics."


I also went through the textbook on English and found it quite repulsive, because it contained many essays on "nature worship" - like a reported speech by an American Indian Chief. But the American Indians were wiped out by the Superior Whites, who built cities. America has over 200  Big Cities - while we, with three times the population, have only five. What utter nonsense!


At the end, I threw the boy's schoolbag out onto the street. His mother was horrified. I told her to get the boy lessons in playing the guitar. Hope she listens to my sincere advice. Music is a great career. While the best that can happen out of State Education is a Government Job.


I think the greatest patriot ever was Frederic Bastiat, whose manifesto of 1848    contained the following "Profession of Faith" on the subject of education": 

If you want to have theories, systems, methods, principles, textbooks and teachers forced on you by the government, that is up to you; but do not expect me to sign, in your name, such a shameful abdication of your rights.

Parents and students must realise that our The State suffers from Complete Ignorance - otherwise this vast sub-continent would not be such a mess. The IAS-IPS know nothing - other than how to hold up files. They cannot even fix the TRAFFIC. They cannot produce accurate Land Ownership Records. 

Anyway, how can they TEACH?

Teaching requires people who have spent years and years acquiring KNOWLEDGE. Have IAS baboons done that?

So let us conclude with what Ludwig von Mises said: 

There is, in fact, only one solution: the state, the government, the laws must not in any way concern themselves with schooling or education. Public funds must not be used for such purposes. The rearing and instruction of youth must be left entirely to parents and to private associations and institutions.

  
In such a scenario there will be DEBATES between scholars of different schools of thought. And the students will be attracted to the TRUTH.


And Truth Will Triumph.


Satyameva Jayate?


Not with State Education.

The Trial Of chacha manmohan s gandhi - Part 3: Take #2

The first post in this series referred to the charge levelled against Dr. Karl Marx at the LSE's Old Theatre - of "having wasted the time of humanity with his theories." 


In yesterday's post, the second of this series, I also pointed out that the entire "miseducation system" that chacha manmohan s gandhi has deliberately designed seeks to waste the precious years of youth in pointless - and intellectually damaging - pursuits. This delays their entry into The Market; it delays marriage by delaying the ability of young people to support themselves; and, what is worse, it corrupts sexual morality by keeping young boys and girls in college where all they do is "party." This is precisely what is happening in the USSA and elsewhere.


Now, time is of the essence. Life is measured in time. Productivity is measured in time. The wages of labour are paid according to time. Interest is charged according to time. Rents are also paid on the basis of time. It is therefore Time that is the most important "factor of production." Our chacha is wasting time - the most precious years of youth.


But it doesn't stop there.


Throughout India, our horrible transport system wastes time on a colossal scale. Our trains are the world's slowest; and as for our "notional highways," the less said the better. I do believe chacha has deliberately not built proper highways in order to FORCE our people to travel by train, which are his MONOPOLY. Modern buses on modern highways would have given the Indian Railways a run for their money. No one travels by train in the USSA because they have Greyhound buses and good highways.


And what about civil aviation? Our chacha has imposed such heavy taxes on "low cost" airlines that, once again, we are FORCED to travel by his unsafe and slow trains, his MONOPOLY.


I also believe our chacha has taken deliberate measures to ensure that the automobile revolution does NOT happen in India. He has done this deliberately in order to protect his cronies - like Rahul Bajaj MP, whose FUCKED-UP auto-rickshaws clog all the streets in all our cities and towns. Actually, Calcutta had an excellent PRIVATE tramway before the automobile was invented. Private tramways in all our small cities and towns would deliver the two- and three-wheeler industry a death-blow.


Further, our chacha has not pursued an "automobile policy" that seeks to ensure that all Indians have cars; rather, he wants all Indians to own motorcycles and scooters, thereby making their lives unsafe, especially when little children have to be ferried about. He is NOT protecting the people and their kids; he is protecting some bozos who cannot compete with duty-free second-hand car, bus and truck imports.


Amazing, ain't it? We fuckers have to sit "competitive examinations" all through our lives - CAT, IIT-JEE, UPSC et. al. But these cronies must be protected at all costs, and kept safe from competition.


One of the costs of such protectionism is human life - our lives. Over 200,000 people die on our unsafe streets and highways - and many times more are seriously injured. But our chacha, the great Central Planner, Chairman of the Planning Commission, would rather provide us with "food security." He seems to be unaware that billions of tonnes of fruit, vegetables and fish rot throughout India because these perishable commodities cannot reach markets on TIME.


Last evening, I had a great dinner off a roadside stall here in Pondicherry: dosas with fried chicken liver. Excellent! I told the vendor that he was engaged in true "social service" - and that the Pondicherry "Food Minister" was engaged in theft.


Since our chacha has also monopolised the teaching of History, I think he has deliberately kept the Babur Nama out of the curriculum, because therein this Great Mughal writes that he was horrified when, after conquering Dilli, he found there was "no cooked food available in the bazaars." He took immediate steps to ensure that this was rectified and Mughlai kebabs were available for the populace. 


Our chacha, the great History teacher, wants to parcel raw rice and wheat to all Indians! In the meantime, ask any street-food vendor in Nude Elly (or anywhere else) as to how much harassment he faces daily from chacha's khaki-costumed goons.


Theatre of the absurd, ain't it?


While we are all wasting Time, it is noteworthy that our great chacha himself has NO TIME TO WASTE. 


There is a lead editorial in The Hindu of today that points to the fact that our great chacha "has held only two press conferences and two interactions with editors in Delhi in the past seven years. As for interviews, he has allowed himself to be questioned by an Indian newspaper only once and never by an Indian [television] news channel."


In other words, these seven or eight long years of chacha's misrule have been a colossal waste of time - for the Free Press, a vital Institution of Freedom, to which I proudly belong, with a track record of 20 years of distinguished service.


Now, as the ancient proverb goes, "Time is money." 


Of course, chacha's fiat paper money loses value with the ticking of the clock. The inflationist-welfarist-Keynesian bozo!


It is HIGH TIME this waster of time and money was shown the door - Exeunt! as The Bard would put it - and this vast sub-continent got down to the serious business of making money by saving Time, which is the only way Productivity can be raised, thereby raising all wages and incomes. 


We need a wholesale transport revolution. 


We need "street security" not "food security."


And we need Sound, Private Money, which will give all our poor people "financial security." Inflationism erodes the Capital of all. And welfarism is nothing but "capital consumption."


[This will be a 5-part series. Stay tuned for more.]