Student of Mises VS Student of Marx
By Tommy Leung on March 22nd, 2009 in Economics, Liberty, Politics, Public Policy

- Image via Wikipedia
I was going to go to bed and perhaps have an early rise in the morning but, I decided to surf Facebook and found myself tagged to a note on someone’s thoughts about capitalism. I had debated this person on the topic of Obama’s economic policies in the recent past. What was obvious from the debate is that I am in support of Liberty and freedom and he is in support of central planning and big government.
It is certainly not rare to have big government supporters in the State or city of New York. Since Obama has become President, I have become more and more a fish out of water when it comes to political debates. Where everyone was against Bush’s idiotic policies, no one dares criticize the Messiah’s idiotic policies. The scariest thing is that they don’t see the similarities.
I consider myself a student of Mises and have learned a great deal from economists, philosophers, and statesman–not statists–who are knowledgeable of his work. While Mises has long ago refuted Marx, it has not stopped the boneheaded Marxian ideas from spreading.
So, while every centrally planned form of government has failed since Marx and before Marx, we are still debating whether a free society is the best one to live in. It was Einstein who defined insanity as doing the same thing over and over again expecting different results. In that sense, all Marxists are insane–and so are their policies.
My motivation to write this instead of sleep was from a Facebook note. This note came about because of a quote I posted by Henry Hazlitt:
“The whole gospel of Karl Marx can be summed up in a single sentence: Hate the man who is better off than you are.”
The author of the Facebook note was outraged. Before I had read this note, I did not know the author was a Marxist. I knew he supported big government and believed it to be a good idea to steal from one group to give to another–in this case it was stealing from the poor to give to the rich or what is known as bailouts.
That is the great irony of all centrally planned societies. They promise prosperity for all and that no man shall be better off than another. In practice, it is true, the masses are all equal–equally poor–and the elite few running the show live like royalty.
“The average person becomes wealthy in the United States through one of a limited amount of things. The most common: Luck. People with the set of skills necessary to profit in the system are actually a dime a dozen. The only difference is that some of them were at the right time and place. I think there’s a book out that recently addressed the subject in great detail, actually.”
I will not disagree that it has become more difficult to make it in the United States. The government has gotten bigger and people have become less free. The only result of that is a lower standard of living for everyone. The problem is not freedom–the only way one can blame freedom that is to ignore all of history.
Of course, when people criticize systems and name them the United States, they are really talking about free markets. Sadly, the free market has been on life support for a long time now in the United States and all the criticisms of how this system is not working is really a criticism of how big government doesn’t work.
In an actual free market, hard work and savings is what makes people wealthy. Creating products and services that benefit the masses is how one is rewarded. There is always luck but, to credit all good things to luck is underestimating yourself and giving yourself a free pass when you fail.
The culture of laziness and not taking responsibility for oneself seems to be greatest draw to Marx. We want to feel that we are “safe” at the expense of being free. We don’t want to do any real work, we just want to complain about how hard we are working and how the “man” is keeping us down!
The book that the above quote refers to is Fooled by Randomness. I have not read the book but, I am aware of it. From what I understand, the book talks about economic success in stocks and financials as being random. Anyone who actually understands economics would know that there is nothing “random” about what happens.
When governments create bubbles, everyone is going to look smart. When the bubble pops, all those previously “smart” people are going to look real dumb. The reasoning is that they weren’t that smart–it was just too hard to fail in the bubble. It isn’t random. The “business cycle” isn’t random–it is created by government and it is predictable.
The better title for that book would be Fooled by Ignorance and Misinformation.
“[W]e have every right to hate the wealthy man- he has no right to that wealth.”
Any free person would find that appalling. Apparently people have a “right” to a house and a “right” to health care but, a person who works hard and saves has no “right” to his own money! Classically Orwellian and also classically Marx.
Those who believe one has no right to his money–his property–but, believes in a right to own a home or a right to health care has zero understanding of Liberty at best. I recently wrote a large piece about Liberty and so I won’t repeat it but, do read it.
“Freedom is not a thought that is readily adaptable to the masses.”
That is even more appalling to free people. It is certainly not unexpected for a Marxist to want to enslave everyone. That is the only way the Marxian utopia can be founded: by force.
“Of course, you are free to stab yourself in the leg. The adrenalin would give you a high, even. What would you do when you started bleeding to death?”
Then you die. If you freely choose to kill yourself–you can do it. I can’t kill you and you can’t kill me but, you can kill you. i don’t recommend it but, it is your choice. Every choice has its consequences and it is our responsibility to deal with them. We have no right to forcibly spread the pain to other people. Other people are free to burden some of our pain if they choose to.
“In this society we have people lacking intelligence, wisdom, or even common sense, running around with the idea that they can do whatever they want with their capital because it is a ‘free’ country. They have no idea what that even means, the true beauty of that concept. Ignorance is indeed bliss.”
They can do whatever they want with the capital outside of hiring someone to kill someone else. Liberty is not a complicated idea–it is a natural one. The irony in stating the people don’t understand what it means to be free is that people understand even less about the effects of government legislation on their lives.
The choice here is to let people live peacefully in “ignorance” or allow one group to enslave another without the other knowing it or consenting to it. To criticize Liberty and then offer an alternative that is even worse is hardly a good argument.
“In considering this, I remembered why I loved Marxist writing. He recognized that in order for wealth to exist, someone must put in the effort needed to create it. This he called labour power. Marx was extremely naive, in that he assumed the human race would be able to put aside greed and selfishness and testosterone in order to assure each person would receive the appropriate result of his labour power. He assumed that we all cared for our fellow man.”
This quote contradicts itself before it is finished. Marx didn’t have all this economic understanding wrong, he just came to wrong conclusions with some of the right concepts. Wealth can only be created through production and savings–absolutely correct.
The author claims Marx is wrong in assuming men are good yet, believes that there should be a big government to regulate everyone else. The classic argument to this is: where do you find these angels? If men are greedy and selfish and you give men great power to regulate and tell others what to do, how are they not going to act in their best interest? If men are evil, the last thing we need is a big government.
History is witness to the fact that big governments only rape and pillage those it governs. Never has a big government done something in the best interest of its citizens over doing what is in the best interest of those in government. This being the greatest fallacy of Marx and all central planners.
“I believe in the America that John Locke and Thomas Jefferson and Ben Franklin believed in. I don’t believe in democracy, because they never believed in it and they were right not to. Seriously, does it make sense to any of you? A person with no college education and no background in politics has the same vote as a doctor, a lawyer, the President! Talk about unqualified for the job. I don’t believe in capitalism, but the free trade system has its uses.”
Everything above contradicts this last paragraph. This final paragraph is the case for Liberty and free markets. There is no system where you can avoid having someone unqualified to rule everyone else. The reality is that we are all unqualified to tell others what to do. We never know what is best for an individual–only they do.
Democracies are garbage and I, like Jefferson and Franklin, do not believe in rule by the majority. I am for Republics as our Founding Fathers were. So while our politicians keep trying to confuse us and tell us that we are a Democracy, we are not. Recite the Pledge of Allegiance and you will note that we pledge allegiance to the Republic. And no where in our founding documents is the word Democracy present.
Ultimately, that last paragraph is hopeful. Hopeful that Americans still understand freedom. It is just a matter of exposing the truth behind financial meltdowns like the one we are experiencing.
They want us to believe it is a “defect” of the free market when the reality is that this was a government creation. They want us to believe this is due to a lack of regulation when the government has never had a heavier arm in the market. They want us to believe that government can protect us from another collapse when they have engineered every major economic collapse since the Great Depression.
There is a reason why the depression in the 30′s is called “Great”. All other depressions didn’t last so long because the government never intervened. Depressions have gotten worse since the creation of the Federal Reserve and the rise of ever greater government–this is not a coincidence. If there is one thing we don’t need, it is more government.
By Tommy LeungTags: austrian economics, big government, Facebook, fooled by randomness, free market, freedom, health care, Henry Hazlitt, Karl Marx, Liberty, mises, New York City, United States, Wealth

![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=804a6a12-871f-48b5-9892-8ce61ca972f8)





March 23rd, 2009 at 12:59 am
Hurmmm… fairly impressed by the site, firstly. Lets take this piecemeal:
“in this case it was stealing from the poor to give to the rich or what is known as bailouts.â€
Blatantly not true. The US Federal Reserve isn’t even a deposit of currency, since all of the money is on loan, mostly from China. Also, Obama’s new tax plans require taxing the rich more heavily, so if it’s going to be paid back, the rich will do it. What of the unfair tax policies that have plagued the “middle†class for decades?
“all the criticisms of how this system is not working is really a criticism of how big government doesn’t work.â€
That’s incredibly generalized. What of the other large nations in the world who were doing just fine until the crisis? Also, how do you define “big?†Economically? By population?
“In an actual free market, hard work and savings is what makes people wealthy.â€
And you say this in the light of how many financial company bonuses?
“We don’t want to do any real work, we just want to complain about how hard we are working and how the “man†is keeping us down!â€
Anybody who has actually read Marx will realize this is exactly the OPPOSITE of what he proposes. Rather, with all these hedge funds, pyramid schemes and investments in our modern market, this quote applies more to American capitalism. Just two weeks ago John Stewart was criticizing Jim Cramer for CBS’s shows that do exactly that- encouraging people to make fast money in unrealistic schemes.
“I have not read the book but, I am aware of it.â€
Then you have no right to discuss it. The rest of that bit is gibberish; you have no idea what you’re talking about. Nobody says the market is random, firstly- but how many people predicted this recession and did something about it? That’s just stupidity.
“Apparently people have a “right†to a house and a “right†to health care but, a person who works hard and saves has no “right†to his own money!â€
The entire point is that this person has NOT worked for that money! You call inheriting a fortune hard work? You call exploiting women or junkies hard work?
“That is even more appalling to free people. It is certainly not unexpected for a Marxist to want to enslave everyone. That is the only way the Marxian utopia can be founded: by force.â€
How do you even get to this conclusion? I can debate freedom for days, but suffice it to say a person has no right or reason to destroy others’ lives just for what he thinks is freedom.
“Every choice has its consequences and it is our responsibility to deal with them.â€
Out of context. The point of that whole bit was to say that you don’t stab after you think about it for two seconds.
“The choice here is to let people live peacefully in “ignorance†or allow one group to enslave another without the other knowing it or consenting to it.â€
Limiting yourself to two options only shows your narrow-mindedness and lack of imagination. Educating these masses, for example, is a different solution. Simply ensuring they do not perish meaninglessly would guarantee a workforce; even for the worst capitalist pig, that’s an appealing concept.
“Marx didn’t have all this economic understanding wrong…Wealth can only be created through production and savings–absolutely correct.â€
WRONG. In so many ways. If you read through it again you’d realize the error I proposed wasn’t economic- it was sociological, psychological, perhaps even egotistic in his judgment of human character. Also, savings is not necessarily wealth, just look at the variable values of currency in the global economy. A person can easily speculate on the future of the economy, transfer his funds into a different currency, and amass a fortune for doing no work at all.
“If men are evil, the last thing we need is a big government.â€
A small government is no different. Japan was ruled by an emperor, and Germany by the Nazis! Caesar, Napoleon, Alexander the Great, all conquerors, all tyrants. Historically your argument doesn’t hold up.
“There is no system where you can avoid having someone unqualified to rule everyone else.â€
Firstly, the point was that an uneducated man is unqualified to even cast a vote, not that the leader is unqualified. Secondly, there are systems that theoretically allow a qualified leader to rule- read some Plato.
You sound like you would reach the same conclusions I have- some of your ideas are my opinions as well. However, you seriously need to educate yourself. Your very method of debate is like listening to a priest in church- all fluff and declarations, with no solid fact to serve as evidence. It is very easy to say that the proverbial “they†want the public to think a certain thing. It is not easy to convince anyone without any proof.
March 24th, 2009 at 12:29 pm
[...] Author: Tommy Leung | 03.24.2009 | Category: Marketing I started a marketing blog a while ago but, I didn’t bother announcing it here. I did put a link to it in the menu under “Marketing”. I’ve been pretty busy with work and sometimes just plain lazy! However, I do find the time to debate people about politics and economics on Facebook. [...]
August 22nd, 2009 at 12:00 pm
“A person can easily speculate on the future of the economy, transfer his funds into a different currency, and amass a fortune for doing no work at all.”
Any money achieved trough intelligence and legal means is valid, just because it wasn’t made by swinging a hammer arund doesn’t mean is not hard work.
“A small government is no different. Japan was ruled by an emperor, and Germany by the Nazis! Caesar, Napoleon, Alexander the Great, all conquerors, all tyrants. Historically your argument doesn’t hold up.”
I don’t understand this piece, do you think the NAZIS wanted small government? that’s completely absurd.
August 26th, 2009 at 4:42 pm
lol, good job Felipe; I honestly have no idea how much of FB Blogger’s “rebuttal” actually refutes anything I wrote.