(c) Cat & Girl

The Road to Serfdom III

The point which is so important is the basic fact that it is impossible for any man to survey more than a limited field, to be aware of the urgency of more than a limited number of needs. Whether his interests centre round his own physical needs, or whether he takes a warm interest in the welfare of every human being he knows, the ends about which he can be concerned will always be only an infinitesimal fraction of the needs of all men. This is the fundamental fact on which the whole philosophy of individualism is based. It does not assume, as is often asserted, that man is egoistic or selfish, or ought to be. It merely starts from the indisputable fact that the limits of our powers of imagination make it impossible to include in our scale of values more than a sector of the needs of the whole society, and that, since, strictly speaking, scales of value can exist only in individual minds, nothing but partial scales of values exist, scales which are inevitably different and often inconsistent with each other. From this the individualist concludes that the individuals should be allowed, within defined limits, to follow their own values and preferences rather than somebody else's, that within these spheres the individual's system of ends should be supreme and not subject to any dictation by others. It is this recognition of the individual as the ultimate judge of his ends, the belief that as far as possible his own views ought to govern his actions, that forms the essence of the individualist position. F.A.Hayek, The Road to Serfdom

Dicas de Discussão

(c) Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal

The Road to Serfdom II

The liberal argument is in favour of making the best possible use of the forces of competition as a means of co-ordinating human efforts, not an argument for leaving things just as they are. It is based on the conviction that where effective competition can be created, it is a better way of guiding individual efforts than any other. It does not deny, but even emphasises, that, in order that competition should work beneficially, a carefully thought-out legal framework is required, and that neither the existing nor the past legal rules are free from grave defects. Nor does it deny that where it is impossible to create the conditions necessary to make competition effective, we must resort to other methods of guiding economic activity. Economic liberalism is opposed, however, to competition being supplanted by inferior methods of coordinating individual efforts. And it regards competition as superior not only because it is in most circumstances the most efficient method known, but even more because it is the only method by which our activities can be adjusted to each other without coercive or arbitrary intervention of authority. Indeed, one of the main arguments in favour of competition is that it dispenses with the need for "conscious social control" and that it gives the individuals a chance to decide whether the prospects of a particular occupation are sufficient to compensate for the disadvantages and risks connected with it. F.A.Hayek, The Road to Serfdom

The Road to Serfdom I

There is nothing in the basic principles of liberalism to make it a stationary creed, there are no hard-and-fast rules fixed once and for all. The fundamental principle that in the ordering of our affairs we should make as much use as possible of the spontaneous forces of society, and resort as little as possible to coercion, is capable of an infinite variety of applications. There is, in particular, all the difference between deliberately creating a system within which competition will work as beneficially as possible, and passively accepting institutions as they are. Probably nothing has done so much harm to the liberal cause as the wooden insistence of some liberals on certain rough rules of thumb, above all the principle of laissez-faire. Yet in a sense this was necessary and unavoidable. Against the innumerable interests who could show that particular measures would confer immediate and obvious benefits on some, while the harm they caused was much more indirect and difficult to see, nothing short of some hard-and-fast rule would have been effective. And since a strong presumption in favour of industrial liberty had undoubtedly been established, the temptation to present it as a rule which knew no exceptions was too strong always to be resisted. F.A.Hayek, The Road to Serfdom

Poupança

Gustavo Matamouros vê-se perante um caso inédito, não só na sua carreira de polícia de homicídios mas também nos anais da história criminosa bem como nos argumentos de séries e livros policiais. Um mafioso albanês, seja A, devido à guerra com o cartel brasileiro, montou uma armadilha a um dos seus chefes, seja B. Este B, individuo recalcitrante, por sua vez, preparou um plano para matar o responsável pela contabilidade da máfia chinesa, seja C (o leitor atento poderá suspeitar que estou a escolher os países pela sua letra inicial matematicamente apetecível e não seria eu a desmentir tal inteligente crença). Ora A era amante da mulher de C o que, após a descoberta levou igualmente a que este, tendo alguma facilidade no acesso a armas de fogo, fosse à casa de A para ajustar contas. Logo a seguir a A ter montado a bomba incendiária ao retardador no carro de B, A foi para casa a pé (eles não moravam longe uns dos outros). O que acontece é que, nesse mesmo dia, B decidira-se reformular o cérebro de C e segui-o até à casa de A. No momento em que A roda a chave, C acciona a bazuca dinamarquesa (seja D) com sucesso e faz desaparecer a face sul da mansão albanesa. Segundo depois, C usa a besta medieval -- artefacto que, pensa ele com alguma razão, lhe dá estilo -- para trespassar as principais artérias de B, instante esse em que a bomba dispara, levando o carro, a besta e o corpo de C para níveis atmosféricos. Um triplo assassinato circular, pensa Gustavo Matamouros, admirado pelo convergir dos eventos que as pistas lhe indicam e na poupança judicial aos contribuintes da cidade, já que Gustavo Matamouros era um indivíduo, acima de tudo, com carácter económico.

Crime

A política, enquanto actor de uma ética racional, deveria ter, como princípio deontológico, aumentar as opções de escolha dos cidadãos da sociedade na qual gere os recursos comuns. Limitada pelos direitos individuais, todos esses recursos deveriam ser usados nesse sentido. Tudo o que é oposto e consumidor, como guerras, cultivar preconceitos artificiais (como a nação), subjugar a justiça e a economia a ideologias não racionalmente defensáveis, serão sempre crimes.

Dicotomias

Lidar com as causas ou mitigar os sintomas. Se o assunto é o individuo essa é a diferença entre a medicina e a aspirina. Mas se falamos da sociedade, os sintomas encarnam-se nos desviantes da regra moral vigente. O Dr. Spleen reconhece que se trocarmos o objectivo da razão pelo subjectivo da tradição, a possibilidade pela limitação, as causas pelas consequências, todos se arriscam em ser loucos se a alternativa única for o robot. O problema é ser cada sociedade um acumular de restrições históricas e irracionalidades cristalizadas na inércia cognitiva dos seus cidadãos. Desse modo, pelo mundo fora (porque a tecnologia ainda não lhe permite atravessar a galáxia à procura de um canto mais sossegado) o vírus da humanidade cozinhou milhares de versões deste problema fundamental, ao qual a escolha, sua, de habitar o menos mau aliado ao hábito de cortar, enfim, pessoas, não chega para compensar o irredutível deste facto.

Balanço

A distância do outro, do vizinho da porta ao lado, que normalmente não vejo, não falo e que vive separado apesar da geografia comum, é uma solução para o decréscimo de conflitos (veja-se as assembleias de condomínio para um aperitivo do que seria de outro modo). Quanto maior o isolamento, menor a violência. Quando o isolamento não pode ser físico, como no caso da urbanidade compacta das nossas cidades, ele expressa-se em apatia, em reserva, em boas maneiras e discreta civilidade. A desintegração da comunidade, como tudo, tem vantagens e desvantagens. Baixa a violência mas aumenta o espaço de manobra do estado paternalista.

Sci-Philosophy IV

We have a disturbed relationship with our past which religion cannot explain. We are primitive in unexplainable ways, our lives woven of the familiar and the strange, the reasonable and the insane.

Governments always commit their entire populations when the demands grow heavy enough. By their passive acceptance, these populations become accessories to whatever is done in their name.

Does a populace have informed consent when a ruling minority acts in secret to ignite a war, doing this to justify the existence of the minority's forces? History already has answered that question. Every society in the ConSentiency today reflects the historical judgment that failure to provide full information for informed consent on such an issue represents an ultimate crime.

Does a population have informed consent when that population is not taught the inner workings of its monetary system, and then is drawn, all unknowing, into economic adventures?

Communal/managed economics have always been more destructive of their societies than those driven by greed. This is what the Dosadi says: Greed sets its own limits, is self-regulating. Frank Herbert, The Dosadi Experiment