You are on page 1of 6


Liberals eighteenth century had full confidence in the perfectibility of man. They
argued that all men are created equal and are endowed with the ability to
understand the meaning of complicated deductions and therefore understand the
economic doctrines and social philosophy, and that only in a free market economy
can be found in complete harmony the well understood interests (ie interests in the
long term) of individuals and groups, so that they become reality the liberal utopia.
Humanity is on the eve of a lasting prosperity and eternal peace because henceforth
reason will prevail.
That optimism was based solely on the assumption that the peoples of all races,
nations and regions are intelligent enough to understand the problems of social
cooperation. They should not doubt it happened. They were convinced that nothing
could stop the progress of enlightenment and dissemination of sound thinking. This
kind of optimism was Lincoln when he said that "you can not fool everyone all the
time." Economic theories that the liberal doctrine is based are irrefutable. For over
one hundred and fifty years failed efforts made to prove the falsity of the teachings
of one of the major precursors of totalitarianism and Nazism, Carlyle, called
"sinister science."
All of these self-styled economists were unable to refute the theory of foreign trade
of Ricardo and the doctrines concerning the effects of government interference in
the market economy. Nobody could refute the demonstration that in a socialist
system economic calculation is impossible. They could not refute the
demonstration that in a market economy there is no conflict between interests well
understood. Now, all men understand their true interests? And if you do not

Suppose that the Socialists are right in their appreciation of socialist planning. understand the theories of Ricardo and Bentham? In a democratic world.understand? Such is the weakness of the liberal plea for a free world in which peaceful cooperation prevail. where Marxists dominated time. how can we expect that the Indians. If that happens with the Germans. imbued with the mysticism Weltgeist Hegel was convinced that in the evolution of human affairs operating factors pushing the proletariat. a professor at the University of Frankfurt. . Most men are too obtuse to follow complicated reasoning inferences. towards the realization of socialism. But millions of Germans are firmly convinced that the allies were not the victors in World War I. Marx. Franz Oppenheimer. a class. No German nationalist has ever recognized that the German army was defeated in the Mame in 1914 and 1918. Men can not see sometimes even the most simple and obvious facts. but was Germany. eventually never errs "[135]. which is the vast majority. The realization of the liberal plan is impossible. implicitly assumed that socialism is the system that best expresses the interests of the proletariat. worshipers of the cow. of course your kind of socialism. Liberalism failed because the intellectual capacity of the vast majority was insufficient to the task of understanding the full extent. and the proletariat would understand. once said: "Individuals are often wrong to look after their own interests. a change can not be expected in the immediate future. Leaving aside for a moment of scruples concerning the possibility of realization of socialism. Nothing should be easier to realize victory or defeat on the battlefield. because at least in our time people would lack the mental capacity to assimilate the principles of the real economy. to the realization of the socialist plans depend on that most recognize your convenience.

exterminate opponents and establish the socialist millennium. They are convinced that only an elite has intellectual capacity to appreciate the benefits of genuine socialism. In such a world. They differ only about who form the elite. the Jefferson. They have found that there are many kinds of socialism and many parties that fought bitterly. there is no remedy possible. They do not believe that humanity can be saved by coercion and oppression. no longer expect that a single model of socialism find the approval of the majority or your own ideal is supported by the entire proletariat. Liberals can not accept this solution. wars and revolutions. They have had to face the fact that while socialism is in many countries the creed of the vast majority. Liberalism is impracticable because most men do not have sufficient illustration to understand what it means. Nor even the tyranny of despots benévolos. In a matter of procedure there is perfect agreement between Lenin and Werner Sombart. In the reasoning of the old liberals it had a psychological error. A stable government requires the free consent of the governed. there is no unanimity regarding the kind of socialism that should be adopted. which so far has not attempted and will not fully realized.has the sacred duty to seize power by violence.can not bring lasting peace and prosperity. They exaggerated the brainpower of the average men and the ability of the elite to make sensible ideas to the less thoughtful of his fellow citizens.Recent Marxists have abandoned these metaphysical illusions. They conclude that called -the elite vanguard of the proletariat. II The essential points of current international problems can be condensed as follows: Lasting peace is only possible under perfect capitalism. They do not believe that a minority. even if the true elite of humanity. can reduce to silence forever the majority. not the mass. unhampered market . If men are not able to understand what is best for them. between Stalin and Hitler. Foresee that dictatorships lead to endless conflicts.

(Also. thus reducing the competitiveness of domestic industries. Since any dependence on foreign trade must restrict government powers of control over economic life. is imperfect if the socialist country relies on imports and therefore should produce items for sale on the market. There are countries that lack adequate natural resources can not feed and clothe the population with its own resources. if it is not done on a global scale. These countries can only search for autarky embarking on a policy of conquest. Free mobility of labor tends toward equal labor productivity and therefore wage rates throughout the world. And even in the short term they would no longer achieve their ends if they were not complemented by immigration barriers. There can be no conflict. Bellicosity and lust of aggression are they the result of their adherence to the statist . public administration and the judges treated the same way the natives and foreigners. but create international conflicts. Workers relatively sparsely populated countries that want to preserve their standard of living through barriers to immigration can not but hurt workers relatively overpopulated countries. Socialism. Law. health and property of individuals against violent or fraudulent aggression. No matter which countries they should sell and buy are socialist or not. Protectionism and autarky mean discrimination against foreign labor and foreign capital.economy. interventionism necessarily aims at autarky. protection of domestic production and in terms of export industries. the field of government activity is limited to protect the life. Government intervention in the economy and the activity of trade unions jointly up domestic production costs. by monopoly. Not only reduce the productivity of human effort and therefore the standard of living of all countries. They are missing the economic causes of war. they will eventually hurt themselves). Socialism should also aim at autarky.

The economic backwardness of a country with rich natural resources provided penalizes the countries whose fate could be improved with more efficient exploitation of its natural wealth. harms other countries.equality. If a national government hinders the most productive use of the country's resources. of consumer goods and capital would be violently opposed to . What say the "progressive" in relation to the internal affairs which traditional ideas of freedom are nothing but a fraud with regard to the poor. However. between rich and poor nations. it also proclaimed spokesmen of nations poorly endowed with natural resources (have not nations) regarding international relations. the same forces that thwarted the attempts of the old liberals to remove barriers to the free movement of labor. They call themselves revolutionaries fighting for their essential rights against the vested interests of a group of reactionary nations. ie a state of affairs in his country could produce within its borders food substances and raw materials it needs to enjoy the same standard of living as the most favored of other nations. But on the other hand. Also a world socialist government could abolish historical inequalities between citizens and citizens relatively overpopulated areas relatively unpopulated areas. it results in the perpetuation of inequalities produced throughout history. Statism seeks equality of individual income within the country. Such is their idea of freedom and equality. and that true freedom means income. In the eyes of German nationalists has no more than freedom: Nahrungsfreiheit (freedom to import foodstuffs).principles. They are not willing to bear their relative poverty forever simply because their fathers were not clever enough to appropriate areas better endowed by nature. The same considerations that drive the masses of a country towards a policy of income equality push the peoples of relatively overpopulated countries to a policy of aggression against relatively unpopulated countries.

The people who refuse to abandon statism can only escape the curse of economic nationalism giving all power to a unified world or a union of democratic nations supranational government. or a federation of Western democracies. in turn. Current plans for world federation. are therefore illusory. Socialists and other statists could dismiss or silence the voices warning of economists. It was easy to prevent unarmed men and products crossing borders. State control of the economy engenders conflicts for which no peaceful solution. The western worker socialism expects an immediate improvement of their own situation and vigorously oppose any plan to establish a democratic system of world government in which their votes would be much less than the vast majority of poor countries. It is unlikely that the relatively unpopulated country worker renounce its inherited privileges. A federal government can only operate in a free market economy.this kind of world socialist administration. All speech advocates of the omnipotence of the State can not override the fact that no more than a system that can bring lasting peace: free market economy. It is not likely to accept a policy for a long period of transition would lower their standard of living and improve not only the material situation of poor countries. It is much more difficult to prevent the passing armies. and this. But they could not ignore and silence the roar reduce the canyon or the bursting of bombs. But unfortunately the vested interests of powerful lobbies opposed to surrendering national sovereignty. conflict. Statism requires a strictly centralized government if there is no trade barriers that isolate some other members. State control leads to economic nationalism. It is useless to surrender to dreams. .