What is Freedom? Can We Keep It?

As we approach another election season, the temperature begins to warm with each passing day. Tempers flare and the temptation to resort to personal attacks grows stronger. The USA enjoys a high level of freedom of speech, and is just one of many freedoms in America.

Americans are legally allowed to share their opinions on religion, politics, government, and even sports. Can we keep this freedom? In this I'll defer to Frederic Bastiat who explained it much better than I could. The Law was written by Bastiat in France in 1850. I encourage all to read it with the intent to understand it.

Freedom is not inherently immortal. Once established, it can be destroyed. How?

An excerpt from The Law:

"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose — that it may violate property instead of protecting it — then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder."


In today's terms, "special-interest groups" hire "lobbyists" to consistently and persistently "lobby" members of Congress in order to "persuade" them to vote in a certain way that, of course, favors their clients.


Unfortunately, this has become the norm. Every member of Congress receives visits from lobbyists. Whether they "buy-in" or not varies, I'm sure, but the fact remains that the law "may be diverted from its true purpose."


Special interests are not new and neither is lobbying. We do owe it to ourselves, however, to ask "How much longer can the freedom-preserving laws of our Republic withstand the destructive waves caused by the persistent onslaught of competing special interests?" Sadly, the circus of Congress has become a spawning ground for lobbyists who are employed to counter-lobby against other special-interest groups. 


More eloquently and succinctly, Bastiat writes:

"See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime. Then abolish this law without delay, for it is not only an evil itself, but also it is a fertile source for further evils because it invites reprisals. If such a law — which may be an isolated case — is not abolished immediately, it will spread, multiply, and develop into a system."

The United States Congress operates in this system today. It needn't be so. I invite you to read the remainder of Bastiat's essay. It's worth the effort.

-Matthew Nielsen

IVLG

Free? Trade

How "free" is Free Trade?

It's not. The only thing free about free trade is the freedom to push for any special treatment you want. Which quickly and regularly negates the first half of the operation's name... Free.

Individuals with influence do this all the time. Special treatment.

I once was talking with an employee at a zoo. During our conversation, a big-name movie star, celebrity type came into the zoo with her children. Immediately she wanted special treatment: a golf cart to shuttle her and her kids to each exhibit, food and beverages, and a gift bag for the kids when they left. This person paid for nothing. Amazing? Normal. Too normal.

The same goes for any of the world's economic leaders. All of them have gained their economic status as a result of foreign trade. This trade between nations is typically governed by trade agreements. The details of these agreements are not always free of elements of protectionism. Often, and nearly always, trade agreements include "provisions" for tariffs and duties on products which a nation is attempting to discourage other countries from exporting to them. They are "protecting" their economy from the competitive imports they receive from other countries.

Crazy!

If you're not competitive with your trading partners, improve or find something you are competitive at!

What is your government really protecting you from? Lower prices. That doesn't seem like protection, though, does it?

"Well, they're protecting our jobs, though." How so? If everyone could buy everything cheaper than they are now through the removal of tariffs, do you think there's a possibility that some of that money may be invested in technologies and industries in your home country? The quick answer is "Of course it could and most likely would, as a normal part of any healthy economy."

I'm ready for free trade.

Bring it on.

Nuclear Iran: US Foreign Policy

In today's "global village" foreign relations is immeasurably important. First and foremost, a nation has a responsibility to its citizens to engage in relationships with other countries for economic reasons. When you're the United States, it's an absolute necessity. How about politics? Today the United States gives away billions of dollars to other countries in the name of... Charity? Good Sportsmanship? Fairness? Economic Interest?


But, how far is too far? Should we be telling other countries what they can and can't do? If you think so, should other countries be telling the USA what to do?

"The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible. So far as we have already formed engagements, let them be fulfilled with perfect good faith. Here let us stop." -George Washington, 1796

Why do politicians tax our incomes then throw it over an ocean or two? WHY!?

They believe they're better judges of who needs my money than I am. Why else would they do it? WHY!?

WHY!?