Reviews for Economics and the good life

The average rating for Economics and the good life based on 2 reviews is 5 stars.

Review # 1 was written on 2012-07-05 00:00:00 Les Herrick Hoppe's argument is essentially a well-executed follow through of Etienne de la Boetie's call to "support [the tyrant] no longer; then you will behold him, like a great Colossus whose pedestal has been pulled away, fall of his own weight and break in pieces." Hoppe does an excellent job extending this line of logic into the modern democratic era. In doing so, he rightfully understands that the institution of the state functions as a monopolist over a territorial region. Consequently, Hoppe observes that governments inherently will trend toward increased exploitation of property while diminishing the quality of goods and services that it offers (law, defense, policing, etc.). Hoppe's truly unique observation to me is his analysis of how democratic governments(which include any form of representative government) make this problem much worse. Since elected officials in representative governments are only temporary caretakers of the economic resources of government, their incentive is to waste more resources in the present and rack up significant long-term debt. In other words, a democratic state, according to Hoppe, speeds up its inevitable destruction and insolvency due to the incentive structure of its elected officials and bureaucratic enforcers to embrace waste. Brilliant. But Hoppe doesn't stop there. It's not enough to merely recognize the failings and evils of the state. Hoppe advocates for a natural order anarchy that is pioneered by small pockets of individuals who care not for the state's control and seek to live in freedom. He advocates for dozens of competing Hong Kongs and Singapores, with no formal regulations established by any government with the power to tax. As these experiments prove to be far more successful than the wasteful and crumbling modern states that are already in the early stages of their death throes, more and more free cities can help society transition from the failed nation state model to liberty. One of the most inspiring things I find about Hoppe's writing is that we really don't even need geographically defined free cities to consider if his ideas will be successful. The digital age is already breaking down traditional geographic barriers and allowing us to experiment with competitive free societies that are based in the digital world, but with everyday, real-world application. Projects like Ethereum are the realization of Hoppe's worldview today, despite all of the massive government regulatory agencies and tens of thousands of laws. Freedom cannot ever be stopped. Hoppe also has a brilliant understanding of why libertarians need to be more conservative and why conservatives need to be more libertarian (which was encouraging to see since I have been thinking the same thing for quite some time). Although I find Hoppe either difficult to understand and even on some points, unpersuasive (at least based on my current understanding), I am highly impressed by Hoppe's overall defense of voluntary society in the face of democratic states and I look forward to the continuing development of technologies that will allow us to realize the ultimate failure of the nation-state experiment as a means of social organization.

Review # 2 was written on 2013-07-19 00:00:00 Thomas Vasquez This is the second time that I read "Democracy the God that Failed", by Hans-Herman Hoppe. The first time I gave it three stars. This time I upped its celestial rating by one star. It is a deep book. For most people it will be contrary to their sensibilities as proud Americans….and contrary to what they have been taught. For it is a critical "Austrian view of an American age"…. That is, it is an Austrian Economics school view of world democratization. Still, if one carefully looks to the US founders, one will find in their words a very prediction of what has come and is coming to pass as concerns democracy, according to Hoppe. Like Hans-Hermann Hoppe, many founders saw in democracy a catalyst for decivilization. Benjamin Franklin said, "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch…" John Adams said, " There never was a democracy that did not commit suicide." Jefferson said, "A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where 51% of the people may take away the rights of the other 49." Madison said "Democracy is the right of the people to choose their own tyrant." John Marshall said that "Between a balanced Republic and a democracy, the difference is like that between order and chaos." Patrick Henry said, "It is the duty of the patriot to protect his country from its government." Franklin also said, "When people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic." And the founders were not the only ones who recognized the depredations of democracy. Oscar Wilde said that, "Democracy means simply the bludgeoning of the people, by the people, for the people. And Karl Marx in a rare moment of accurate insight said, "Democracy is the Road to Socialism." Seeing this danger, the founders set up a Republic, informed by the Declaration, and bounded by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights meant to set up a filter between government and democracy and to limit the powers of government. They built a wall against tyranny that thwarted the governments' drive for increasing power but proved ultimately to be tragically porous. What happened? Through time, government caretakers (elected officials) ignored the Constitution, and finding that being more "responsive" to the people also aligned with their own goals for greater power, began to institute more and more democratic reforms…. More and more programs that benefited the short time horizon of their term of office. More and more programs that set up dangerous dependencies but also assured election and re-election of the patrons. This democratic infusion ignited a process of decivilization which has direct bearing on the current chaotic political situation of the US and the world. Democratization, according to Hoppe was inevitable, as was that it would result in progressive decivilization-- in contrast to rule by monarchy. How then to account for the remarkable material success of the US and Western society other than recent times? The success has come despite democratization. So does Hoppe call for a return to monarchy? No, because first, monarchy now shattered cannot be reconstituted and second because monarchy, though less destructive than democracy, is also destructive to the natural order of man. And what is, says Hoppe, the natural order of man? It is "ordered anarchy" and other such terms including "private property anarchism," "private property anarchism," "anarcho-capitalism," "private law society," and "pure capitalism." It is only in these systems, where territorial monopolists (governments) of all kinds have been abolished that man consistently leans toward greater peaceful prosperity and civilization. Meanwhile, both monarchy and democracy are both parasitic; differing only in that monarchy being a private parasitism is generally less destructive. *Hoppe makes a convincing case that the shorter time horizons of democracy leads to a chaotic tendency towards decivilization. * He makes a convincing case that democracy is inevitably redistributive and at enmity with principles of private property. * He makes a convincing case that private property rights lead to longer time horizons resulting in a steady rise of both prosperity and civilization. * He correctly points out that while crime results in only intermittent property rights violations, government property rights violations, presented as legitimate, are continual and inevitably increase over time. * He correctly upholds the importance of the family and of private property in enabling the progress of man, and its undermining to be a primary cause for his degradation. * He (inaccurately I think) fingers the democracy as the cause of the rise of total war, while ignoring other factors that have greater merit in determining this outcome. * He calls the US Constitution a "noble experiment" that has failed due to its fatal error of putting temporary and interchangeable caretakers, democratically elected, in charge of a nationwide monopoly of justice and protection. While he brings thought provoking evidence to this charge, I am not convinced that the noble experiment should be abandoned. So how do we stop and correct the process of decivilization before total chaos results? Hoppe says first and foremost that we must delegitimize the idea of majority rule and inculcate its alternative-- Natural Order-- based on the supreme principle of private property and powered by self determination and self rule. This will set into motion centrifugal forces of decentralization which is more amenable to natural order. Murkily, he insists that individuals and insurance institutions will be able to take over the traditional government role of protection and that a "secession" of the withdrawal of support for the central government union will ultimately be successful in accomplishing the abolition of government and the establishment of a private law society based on natural order. As you read "Democracy, the God that Failed" you may have difficulty with the appropriateness of Hoppe's policy prescriptions, but you will be astounded at the accuracy of his analysis. You will be vigorously prodded to think anew about the efficacy of democracy as a vehicle for the progress of man.