OpenMinded
Member
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2011
- Messages
- 16
I do not know. I have studied, researched, and experienced many things, but I do not really know much of anything to a certainty. Then why should you listen to me? Because I am admitting my ignorance at the outset.
I’m tired of the labels. I’m tired of conclusory arguments. I’m tired of watching people scream out their position without a moment’s consideration. I’m tired of “Democrats” must believe in “this” and “Republicans” believe in “that.” I’m tired of being told what I should be doing, what I should believe, and what I should care about. I’m tired of hearing the federal government has all the answers to all our problems. The plain truth is this: no one really knows what they are talking about.
This does not stop people from acting like they know. The tool of choice for the audaciously ignorant is laughter and pompousness. For some reason, people consider those types of actions as indications that a person knows something they don’t. The way to combat these tactics is to simply ask: why? Why are you laughing? Why do you think you know? Why do you reach that conclusion without any supporting evidence?
Ron Paul supporters have a Socratic advantage. Socrates declared he was wiser than others because in all probability no one knew anything, yet people thought they did when they do not and Socrates neither knew anything nor imagined he did. Likewise, Ron Paul supporters admit our ignorance. At some point, each of us realized how little we actually know about how the world worked. How little we knew of history. How little we knew of economics. How little we knew of the Constitution. How little we knew about a Federal government’s tendencies. Each of us is still learning.
In fact, supporting Ron Paul means fundamentally supporting the idea that no single individual or small group of individuals can be consistently relied upon for the best answer in the least amount of time. Opponents will argue that the very fact no individual can be trusted with any important, complex decision supports the conclusion that the federal government should become involved. However, the truth is, the government is simply comprised of people. And those people are just as ignorant as the rest of us.
Ron Paul supports free markets. Free market capitalism is the only known system shown to raise the average person above grinding poverty. A profound example occurred when the Soviet Union showed The Grapes of Wrath--a film depicting the Great Depression in America--to its people in an effort to convince them about the perils and results of free market capitalism. The plan backfired.
The Soviet people were impressed that the family in the movie, despite being “poor”, actually had a vehicle. Further, they were impressed the family was free to move to a different location to start anew when things got bad. People are often ignorant of their relative position. Poverty in the US is different from poverty in Africa.
But what does it really mean to support a free markets and free enterprise? It means we admit the ignorance of the few. It means that we realize that the few cannot control markets, create efficiency or prosperity. They are ignorant of all the necessary information.
Intelligence and ignorance are different. Ignorance is the state of being uninformed. Intelligence is simply the ability to learn. However, being informed is often not enough when the information is too one-sided. To quote Ronald Reagan, the “trouble with our Liberal friends is not that they are ignorant, it is just that they know so much that isn’t so.”
Supporting free markets is an implicit admission that any one group of human beings is ignorant. Thus, we choose to defer to the most informed, efficient, effective, and proven system recorded human history has seen: free market capitalism.
Free market capitalism is the only system capable of making sense of the billions of transactions and information constantly occurring worldwide. It is absurd to think dozens or even hundreds of federal government people are capable of gathering, understanding, and efficiently reacting to billions of transactions happening 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, and 365 days per year.
The free market is simply composed of people as well. However, it is comprised of all the people. It is all the information—from top to bottom. In short, why would we want only a few people to be tasked with determining what is “right” for the economy? Why would we want only a few people to be tasked with helping the less fortunate? I want all the people to bear the burden of the demands that constantly change and evolve.
Finally, audaciously ignorant people will scream that free markets create greed. The argument continues that anyone who supports free markets necessarily want to make the greedy powerful without constraint. This blatant example of ignorance fails for three reasons.
First, greed is a consequence of being human. It is not a consequence of free markets. Would eliminating free markets eliminate greed? If so, then greed should not exist as a truly free market does not exist.
Second, greedy people in a free market have less power to impact the masses. The “anti-greed” solution, posed by the ignorant, is to concentrate the power to our trustworthy elected officials and other politically-appointed agents. This makes no sense. By concentrating the power, it becomes much easier for a relatively few to have massive influence. Even worse, the people most likely to strive to attain these positions of concentrated power are the ambitious, self-interested politicians. So, in effect, the “answer” is to concentrate the power into positions likely to assumed by the most greedy. It is paradoxical and ignorant.
Third, governments do play an essential role in free markets.
Continue reading at: http://www.ronforrevolution.com/blog.py
Join the Revolution at the site!
I’m tired of the labels. I’m tired of conclusory arguments. I’m tired of watching people scream out their position without a moment’s consideration. I’m tired of “Democrats” must believe in “this” and “Republicans” believe in “that.” I’m tired of being told what I should be doing, what I should believe, and what I should care about. I’m tired of hearing the federal government has all the answers to all our problems. The plain truth is this: no one really knows what they are talking about.
This does not stop people from acting like they know. The tool of choice for the audaciously ignorant is laughter and pompousness. For some reason, people consider those types of actions as indications that a person knows something they don’t. The way to combat these tactics is to simply ask: why? Why are you laughing? Why do you think you know? Why do you reach that conclusion without any supporting evidence?
Ron Paul supporters have a Socratic advantage. Socrates declared he was wiser than others because in all probability no one knew anything, yet people thought they did when they do not and Socrates neither knew anything nor imagined he did. Likewise, Ron Paul supporters admit our ignorance. At some point, each of us realized how little we actually know about how the world worked. How little we knew of history. How little we knew of economics. How little we knew of the Constitution. How little we knew about a Federal government’s tendencies. Each of us is still learning.
In fact, supporting Ron Paul means fundamentally supporting the idea that no single individual or small group of individuals can be consistently relied upon for the best answer in the least amount of time. Opponents will argue that the very fact no individual can be trusted with any important, complex decision supports the conclusion that the federal government should become involved. However, the truth is, the government is simply comprised of people. And those people are just as ignorant as the rest of us.
Ron Paul supports free markets. Free market capitalism is the only known system shown to raise the average person above grinding poverty. A profound example occurred when the Soviet Union showed The Grapes of Wrath--a film depicting the Great Depression in America--to its people in an effort to convince them about the perils and results of free market capitalism. The plan backfired.
The Soviet people were impressed that the family in the movie, despite being “poor”, actually had a vehicle. Further, they were impressed the family was free to move to a different location to start anew when things got bad. People are often ignorant of their relative position. Poverty in the US is different from poverty in Africa.
But what does it really mean to support a free markets and free enterprise? It means we admit the ignorance of the few. It means that we realize that the few cannot control markets, create efficiency or prosperity. They are ignorant of all the necessary information.
Intelligence and ignorance are different. Ignorance is the state of being uninformed. Intelligence is simply the ability to learn. However, being informed is often not enough when the information is too one-sided. To quote Ronald Reagan, the “trouble with our Liberal friends is not that they are ignorant, it is just that they know so much that isn’t so.”
Supporting free markets is an implicit admission that any one group of human beings is ignorant. Thus, we choose to defer to the most informed, efficient, effective, and proven system recorded human history has seen: free market capitalism.
Free market capitalism is the only system capable of making sense of the billions of transactions and information constantly occurring worldwide. It is absurd to think dozens or even hundreds of federal government people are capable of gathering, understanding, and efficiently reacting to billions of transactions happening 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, and 365 days per year.
The free market is simply composed of people as well. However, it is comprised of all the people. It is all the information—from top to bottom. In short, why would we want only a few people to be tasked with determining what is “right” for the economy? Why would we want only a few people to be tasked with helping the less fortunate? I want all the people to bear the burden of the demands that constantly change and evolve.
Finally, audaciously ignorant people will scream that free markets create greed. The argument continues that anyone who supports free markets necessarily want to make the greedy powerful without constraint. This blatant example of ignorance fails for three reasons.
First, greed is a consequence of being human. It is not a consequence of free markets. Would eliminating free markets eliminate greed? If so, then greed should not exist as a truly free market does not exist.
Second, greedy people in a free market have less power to impact the masses. The “anti-greed” solution, posed by the ignorant, is to concentrate the power to our trustworthy elected officials and other politically-appointed agents. This makes no sense. By concentrating the power, it becomes much easier for a relatively few to have massive influence. Even worse, the people most likely to strive to attain these positions of concentrated power are the ambitious, self-interested politicians. So, in effect, the “answer” is to concentrate the power into positions likely to assumed by the most greedy. It is paradoxical and ignorant.
Third, governments do play an essential role in free markets.
Continue reading at: http://www.ronforrevolution.com/blog.py
Join the Revolution at the site!
