This timely quote from yesterday’s article at the Mises Institute is dedicated to my libertarian and Casey Phyle friends, as well as my, passive freedom loving readers…
Here the best theories are useless if not supported by public opinion. They cannot work if not accepted by a majority of the people. Whatever the system of government may be, there cannot be any question of ruling a nation lastingly on the ground of doctrines at variance with public opinion. In the end the philosophy of the majority prevails. In the long run there cannot be any such thing as an unpopular system of government. The difference between democracy and despotism does not affect the final outcome. It refers only to the method by which the adjustment of the system of government to the ideology held by public opinion is brought about. Unpopular autocrats can only be dethroned by revolutionary upheavals, while unpopular democratic rulers are peacefully ousted in the next election.
The supremacy of public opinion determines not only the singular role that economics occupies in the complex of thought and knowledge. It determines the whole process of human history.
The customary discussions concerning the role the individual plays in history miss the point. Everything that is thought, done and accomplished is a performance of individuals. New ideas and innovations are always an achievement of uncommon men. But these great men cannot succeed in adjusting social conditions to their plans if they do not convince public opinion.
The flowering of human society depends on two factors: the intellectual power of outstanding men to conceive sound social and economic theories, and the ability of these or other men to make these ideologies palatable to the majority.
That’s an excerpt from the magnum opus of the great Professor Ludwig von Mises.
The bottom line is that the battle for freedom fundamentally hinges on the arena of education, where ideas of liberty must be made “palatable to the majority”.
In short, communicate to educate. And we can speak or write or do both. Aside from traditional mediums, the internet has facilitated horizontal flow of communications through blogs (such as this), podcasts, social media, youtube, or etc…, which essentially bypasses the top-down flow communication monopolized and controlled by statists and their cronies. Debates can be held on neutral grounds which runs to our favor.
Remember the more the sources of ideas of freedom, the greater the chances that these may become public talking points.
Localizing freedom or merging freedom with domestic applications should increase the topical relevance that should connect with the local audience and thus attract wider participants.
In other words, communicate freedom under the framework of your specialty.
Consequently, a widening reach to the public implies higher chances for social acceptability or a change in public opinion. It’s no easy task as Professor von Mises and our free market champions have shown.
But the deepening of the information age and the law of depreciating returns for vertical organizations has been and will continue to provide us with useful examples of why individual liberty is the only option to the economically unsustainable alternative of statism. There is no middle of the road compromise.
Freedom and the basic law economics are inherently compatible. And that's why I am optimistic that the knowledge revolution will provide the ideological justification for political reforms that should lead to social decentralization.
No comments:
Post a Comment