Confusing Freedom With Collectivism

Sometimes experts are at a seeming loss of what’s been happening in the MENA region.

PIMCO’s Mohamed El Erian at the Reuters writes,

Post-regime change countries, such as Egypt and Tunisia, are working hard to complete their revolutions and to ensure an orderly and complete transition to greater democracy and individual freedoms. Success lies in the following factors: defining a vision and associated action plan which command sufficient popular support; coordinating simultaneous progress on related economic, political and social issues; and implementing appropriate mid-course corrections as needed.

If “greater democracy and individual freedoms” means sovereignty of the individual over government then how does “defining a vision and associated action plan” happen?

Individual “plans” are much different than from those of the central planners, for the fundamental reason that the individual views the world differently and has priorities, values and preferences that are unique, thereby the individuals “plans” according to their perceived ‘unique’ interests. In short, one’s actions are one’s own.

However, since governments are composite of people, except that they are mandated to use the power coercion over the others, then “defining a vision and associated action plan” would be inconsistent with the individual sovereignty.

That’s because so-called “plans” spring from the perspective, values, preferences and priorities of the central planners and not from the collective individuals.

In essence, “greater democracy and individual freedoms” under the above context would represent a sham.

As Henry Louise Mencken once wrote, "For every problem there is one solution which is simple, neat, and wrong."