Dumb Voter No More . com
Where We Went Wrong
Dumb Voter No More . com
What Really Goes On In Washington
Philosophy of Liberty
Where We Went Wrong
What We Need To Do
Limiting Politicians
Democracy vs Freedom
Man's Rights
The Moral Foundation of a Free Society
FOUNDATION of a FREE SOCIETY
Good Govt Protects Individual Rights
Property and Government
Freedom, Individual Rights, Capitalism
Bankruptcy of a Mixed Economy
FREEDOM and GOVERNMENT
Land of Liberty - Society and Government
Rewards of Economic Freedom
Separation of Economics and State
Flat Tax vs Sales Tax
Library of Liberty
Common Sense Laws
What's Wrong With Conservatives
FREE MARKETS and LIBERTY
The Law and Plunder
Politicians, Plunder, Wasteful Spending
Constitution and Progressives
Learning From Walter Williams
POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY -ayn rand
Capitalism Center
Principles of a Free Society vs The Road to Socialism
Government, Capitalism, Welfare
Income Inequality - World Poverty
Free People Are Not Equal and Equal People Are Not Free
Collectivism-Statism-Socialism-Communism
FREE TRADE
Bloody Politics - Why Socialism Failed
Vision of a Free Society
Proper Government
Foreign Policy
Government Spending - Global Capitalism
Collectivism vs Individualism
Taxes Can Destroy
Capitalism and Selfishness
Man-Government-Liberty-Tyranny
The Basic Issue--Mixed Economy--Seven Principles
Individual Rights
Life , Liberty , Property
Politicians and the Economy
Rights and Limited Government
Good Sites to Visit
Vices and Crimes - A Better Philosophy
Immigration
Constitutional Primer #7 - Property Rights
Right to Own Guns
Majority Limited and Pursuit of Happiness
POLITICS and FREEDOM
The American Revolution - Classical Liberalism
Politics and Plunder - Welfare and Charity
What Is Money - Seperating Money and State
Separating School and State
POLITICS - PART 2
Taxes and Property
The Anatomy of the State
American Government Idea's
Good Quotes
ABORTION , Questions and Answers
Learn Economics Here
Three Youngsters Drown
INCOME for LIFE
OUR LORD'S PROPHECY PREDICTED AND FULFILLED
JESUS CAME BACK
FUTURISM, FIGURATIVE PRETERISM and LITERAL PRETERISM by W. Hibbard
WERE THE APOSTLES FALSE PROPHETS? by M. Fenemore
Lee's Bio
GUESTBOOK & LINKS

Ayn Rand observed decades ago that "one of the methods used by statists to destroy capitalism consists in establishing controls that tie a given industry hand and foot, making it unable to solve its problems, then declaring that freedom has failed and stronger controls are necessary."

FDR and the End of Economic Liberty
by Jacob G. Hornberger, August 1991

The watershed years were 1932-1937 — the first two presidential terms of Franklin D. Roosevelt. This was the crucial period in American history — the period in which Americans abandoned the principles of economic liberty on which our nation was founded. For it was during this time that the welfare-state, planned-economy way of life replaced the private-property, market-economy way of life which had existed up to that time.

Of course, this is not what Americans have been taught. From the first grade in their government-approved schools, the American people have been indoctrinated into believing that the Great Depression was the failure of America's free-enterprise system, that FDR's New Deal saved free enterprise, and that the economic system which characterizes the United States today is one of free enterprise. And the indoctrination is so effective that adults continue to believe the myths with falsehoods despite truth and reality and, even worse, continue to force their children to undergo the same political indoctrination in today's government-approved schools.

With exceptions (slavery being the worst), during the first 150 years of America's history, people were free to live their lives in any way they chose as long as their actions did not entail violence or fraud against others. Americans could engage in any economic enterprise without permission or regulation ... accumulate unlimited amounts of wealth without political interference ... do whatever they wanted with their money ... and travel anywhere in the world without a passport or other evidence of governmental consent.

This unique way of life was what distinguished the United States from all other nations in history. It was this way of life that became known as one of "free enterprise."

And our American ancestors believed that charity — the caring of human beings for each other — meant nothing unless it came from the willing hearts of individuals. And so our ancestors provided a way of life in which people could not be forced to help or serve others. The result was the most charitable nation in the history of man.

In 1913, the abandonment began. For it was during that year that the 16th Amendment — the income tax — was enacted. Appealing to the sins of envy and covetousness, the American politicians and bureaucrats promised that the tax would be levied only on the rich and that it would never exceed a very minute percentage. Ignoring the warnings of their ancestors, the American people rendered unto Caesar the omnipotent power to control the fruits of their earnings.

But that wasn't all. Also in 1913, the American people permitted the passage of the Federal Reserve Act which created a central bank, enabling governmental officials to control the amount of credit and currency in the economy. It was an action which ultimately would match — if not exceed — the destructive power of the income tax.

As documented so well by free-market economists Ludwig von Mises, Friedrich Hayek, and Murray Rothbard, during the 1920s, the Federal Reserve Board, exercising its power to expand the money supply, caused an inflationary binge — an action which created a false aura of prosperity. When the political authorities — faced with this inflationary threat and restrained by the gold standard — finally ceased the monetary expansion near the end of the decade, the inevitable economic hangover was reflected in the 1929 stock market crash and in generally depressed economic conditions. In other words, contrary to the indoctrination which the American people have received from their political authorities, the Great Depression was not the failure of America's free-enterprise system — it was the failure of political manipulation of money and credit.

Franklin D. Roosevelt was elected President in 1932. Faced with the Great Depression — a depression which had been caused by government itself — Roosevelt's "solution" was to implement the socialist-fascist economic system under which Americans now suffer. Under the banner of "saving America's free-enterprise system," FDR was directly responsible for the abandonment of America's 150-year history of free enterprise.

Arguing that the American people could no longer be trusted to be charitable to others, FDR claimed that government — the organized means of coercion and compulsion — was needed to help those in need. And to effect this claim, he secured the passage of his New Deal for Americans. Roosevelt used the disastrous results of one governmental intervention — political manipulation of money — to justify another — the socialist ideal of using government to steal from those who have in order to give the loot to those who need.

And what the American people had permitted to be done to them in 1913 came back to haunt them in a terribly disastrous way, for it was through the income tax and the power to expand money and credit that Roosevelt was able to accomplish effectively his political plundering and looting, not only from the rich but from everyone in all walks of life.

But Roosevelt did more than just enshrine into the American political and economic system the ideas of Karl Marx and Joseph Stalin (the mass murderer FDR affectionately referred to as "Uncle Joe"). Greatly admiring Benito Mussolini's fascist system in Italy, Roosevelt proceeded to implement the same type of economic system in the U.S. For example, his National Recovery Act gave him virtually unlimited dictatorial powers over American business and industry. And any American citizen who did not do his "patriotic" duty by supporting the NRA and its "Blue Eagle" soon found himself at the receiving end of FDR's vengeance and retaliation.

And it was during this period of time that such alien schemes as the Social Security Act, the FDIC, the Agricultural Adjustment Act, the Emergency Banking Relief Act the Tennessee Valley Authority, the Federal Securities Act, and the National Labor Relations Act came into existence — all with the aim of taking control of people's lives as well as absolving them from responsibility for errors and foolhardiness by giving them the political loot that had been stolen from others.

But all of this was not sufficient for FDR. He persuaded Congress to provide him a power which Stalin and Mussolini proudly possessed: the power to nationalize people's gold. And his confiscation of gold was accompanied by one of the most shameful acts in American history: the repudiation of government debts payable in gold — the noteholders, most of whom were Americans who had in good faith trusted their government, were instead paid in devalued paper money.

And what was the reaction of the American people to the evil, immoral, and tyrannical acts of FDR? Like people in other parts of the world who were suffering under dictatorial rule — Russians, Germans, and Italians — most of them reacted like sheep — meekly going along with their own slaughter and, in many instances, ardently supporting it. Having lost the sense of self-reliance which had characterized their ancestors — having lost their faith in freedom and themselves — having lost their faith in God Himself — the American people proceeded to relinquish to Caesar the power to direct their lives and plunder their fortunes, just as people throughout history had done.

But there were great patriots who stood fast and fought hard against the evil and immoral machinations of FDR. Some were well-known — men like John T. Flynn, Albert J. Nock, Garet Garrett, and Hamilton Fish. Others were less well-known — and now long forgotten — but who were equally devoted to the principles of America's Founding Fathers — men like Benjamin Wallace Douglass, a farmer from Brown County, Indiana; William S. Mudd, a newspaperman from Tuscaloosa, Alabama; and J. Edward Jones, an oil man from Kansas. Knowing that FDR was one of the most ruthless men who have ever held political office, these individuals nonetheless pledged their lives, fortunes, and sacred honor in the defense of what they knew to be right.

For several years, the U.S. Supreme Court, led by four justices — Sutherland, Butter, Van Devanter, and McReynolds — declared FDR's socialist and fascist New Deal policies in violation of the United States Constitution — in violation of every principle of individual liberty and limited government on which this nation was founded.

But the end came in 1937. In what many judicial scholars say was a result of Roosevelt's disgraceful and pathetic attempt to pack the court with some of his cronies, a fifth justice — Owen J. Roberts, whose vote had helped to invalidate much of the New Deal — shifted his vote in favor of Roosevelt's policies. And with Roosevelt thereafter being able to replace dying and retiring justices with ones who would do his bidding, the era of American economic liberty came to a sad and tragic end.

Is it possible to recapture the principles of freedom on which America was founded — to end the welfare-state, planned-economy way of life — to return to a true free-enterprise system — to regain the moral principles associated with individual liberty and limited government? You bet it is! But it will take a willingness to confront reality and to free our minds — and those of our children — from years of political indoctrination ... a readiness to fight for what we know to be right and true ... a faith in freedom and the caring nature of others ... and a conviction that man, not government, should ultimately control his own destiny.  www.fff.org

A Formula For Prosperity

The principle behind this American philosophy can be reduced to a rather simple formula:

Economic security for all is impossible without widespread abundance. Abundance is impossible without industrious and efficient production. Such production is impossible without energetic, willing and eager labor. This is not possible without incentive.

Of all forms of incentive - the freedom to attain a reward for one's labors is the most sustaining for most people. Sometimes called THE PROFIT MOTIVE, it is simply the right to plan and to earn and to enjoy the fruits of your labor.

This profit motive DIMINISHES as government controls, regulations and taxes INCREASE to deny the fruits of success to those who produce. Therefore, any attempt THROUGH GOVERNMENTAL INTERVENTION to redistribute the material rewards of labor can only result in the eventual destruction of the productive base of society, without which real abundance and security for more than the ruling elite is quite impossible.

An Example Of The Consequences Of Disregarding These Principles

We have before us currently a sad example of what happens to a nation which ignores these principles. Former FBI agent, Dan Smoot, succinctly pointed this out on his broadcast number 649, dated January 29, 1968, as follows:

"England was killed by an idea: the idea that the weak, indolent and profligate must be supported by the strong, industrious, and frugal - to the degree that tax-consumers will have a living standard comparable to that of taxpayers; the idea that government exists for the purpose of plundering those who work to give the product of their labor to those who do not work. The economic and social cannibalism produced by this communist-socialist idea will destroy any society which adopts it and clings to it as a basic principle - ANY society."

Scroll down for next article ...

The Free Market versus the Interventionist State

The Interventionist State Is Based on Coercion and Violence, Not Human Liberty

During the first half of 1926, Austrian economist Ludwig von Mises visited the United States on a three-month lecture tour. After his return to his native Austria, he delivered a talk on “Changes in American Economic Policy” at a meeting of the Vienna Industrial Club. He explained:

The United States has become great and rich under the power of an economic system that has set no limits on the free pursuit of the individual, and has thereby made room for the development of the country’s productive power. America’s unprecedented economic prosperity is not the result of the richness of the American land, but rather of the economic policy that understood how best to take advantage of the opportunities that the land offers. American economic policy has always rejected—and still rejects today—any protection for inferiority and uncompetitiveness over efficiency and competitiveness. The success of this policy has been so great that one would believe the Americans would never change it.

But Mises went on to tell his Viennese audience that new voices were being heard in America, voices that claimed it was necessary and desirable to bring private enterprise under government control and for the state to more directly concern itself with the redistribution of wealth. A strong movement had arisen in the United States among academics and intellectuals, in the media and in the political arena, to push the country in this direction.

Indeed, in the America of 1926, Mises observed, “Both political parties, the Republicans as well as the Democrats, are ready to take radical steps in this direction, in order to retain the votes of the electorate.” He concluded that “the results from such a policy will be no different in America than from those ‘achieved’ in Europe.”

In many parts of Europe the trend toward collectivism in the 1930s and 1940s took the extreme forms of communism, fascism, and Nazism. They represented total rejection of a free economy and individual liberty. In America the collectivist trend never went to such extremes, though Franklin D. Roosevelt’s first New Deal came very close to the fascist model. (See my column “When the Supreme Court Stopped Economic Fascism in America,” The Freeman, October 2005.)

Today communism, fascism, and Nazism are all dead in their twentieth-century forms. They failed miserably, bringing nothing but death and destruction. But while many claim—on both the political left and the right—that in their place capitalism has triumphed, what prevails around the world is far from what classical-liberal economists like Mises considered a free-market economy.

The following eight points, I suggest, define a genuine free-market economy:

  1.  All means of production are privately owned.
  2.  The use of these means of production is under the control of private owners who may be individuals or corporate entities.
  3.  Consumer demand determines how the means of production will be used.
  4.  Competitive forces of supply and demand determine the prices for consumer goods and the various factors of production, including labor.
  5.  The success or failure of individual and corporate enterprises is determined by the profits or losses these enterprises earn, based on their greater or lesser ability to satisfy consumer demand in competition with their rivals in the marketplace.
  6.   The market is not confined to domestic transactions and includes freedom of trade and the free movement of people internationally.
  7.   The monetary system is based on a market-determined commodity (for example, gold or silver), and the banking system is private and competitive, neither controlled nor regulated by government.
  8.  Government is limited in its activities to the protection of life, liberty, and property.

By this definition neither the United States nor any other country in the world is currently a free-market society. Then what type of economic system do we have? Mises also explained this in his 1929 collection of essays, Critique of Interventionism:

Nearly all writers on economic policy and nearly all statesmen and party leaders are seeking an ideal system which, in their belief, is neither capitalistic nor socialistic, is based neither on [unrestricted] private property in the means of production nor on public property. They are searching for a system of private property that is hampered, regulated, and directed through government intervention and other social forces, such as labor unions. We call such an economic policy interventionism, the system itself the hampered market order.

An Interventionist Economy

Here are seven points that define an interventionist economy:

  1.  The private ownership of the means of production is restricted or abridged by the political authority.
  2.  The use of the means of production by private owners is subject to government prohibition or regulation.
  3.  The users of the means of production are prevented from being guided solely by consumer demand.
  4.  Government influences or controls the formation of prices for consumer goods and/or the factors of production, including labor. Government reduces the impact of supply and demand on the success or failure of various enterprises while increasing its own influence and control over market incomes through such artificial means as pricing and production regulations, limits on freedom of entry into markets, direct and indirect subsidies, and redistribution of wealth.
  5.  Free entry into the domestic market by potential foreign rivals is discouraged or prevented through import prohibitions, tariffs, or quotas. Freedom of movement is prohibited or abridged.
  6.  The monetary system is regulated by government for the purpose of influencing what is used as money, the value of money, and the rate at which the quantity of money is increased or decreased. All of these are used as tools for affecting employment, output, and growth in the economy.
  7.  Government’s role is not limited to the protection of life, liberty, and property.

It is important to note that the interventionist system represented by these seven points can only be implemented through violent means. Only the threat or the use of force can make people follow courses of action that differ from the ones that they would have taken if not for government intervention. Thus while intervention is usually discussed under the heading “public policy,” there is nothing “public” about them. They are coercive policies carried out by politicians and bureaucrats.

Contrast these policies with the free market, or unhampered economy, as we defined it. What is most striking is the voluntary nature of truly market-based social arrangements. Violence or its threat is reduced to a minimum, and the individual is left at liberty to live his own life and improve his circumstances through free association with others.

We need to share with our fellow citizens a clear and persuasive vision of the free society and the free-market economy. If we succeed, the era of the interventionist state can be replaced with a new epoch of human liberty.  www.fee.org

The Power Of True Liberty From Improper Governmental Interference

Nearly two hundred years ago, Adam Smith, the Englishman, who understood these principles very well, published his great book, THE WEALTH OF NATIONS, which contains this statement:

"The natural effort of every individual to better his own condition, when suffered to exert itself with freedom and security, is so powerful a principle, that it is alone, and without any assistance, not only capable of carrying on the society to wealth and prosperity, but of surmounting a hundred impertinent obstructions with which the folly of human laws too often encumbers its operations; though the effect of these obstructions is always more or less either to encroach upon its freedom, or to diminish its security." (Vol. 2, Book 4, Chapt. 5, p. 126)