Another Fool, Another State Agent In The Free Press, Another Moral Degenerate: Take #2

"The Morality of Markets" by Anil Padmanabhan, Deputy Managing Editor of Mint, is the most morally perverse article I have ever read.

His anti-market society stand is based on, of course - his deep concern for the poor. And the farmer. And the "vexing issue of land."

Further, he wants everything "regulated."

This means more and more "legislation" as well as "subordinate legislation" that will empower bureaucrats of all ranks to interfere in the affairs of businessmen. The market - which means businessmen - will not be "free." Competition will be restricted. There will be "favourites." The consumer will not be king. And the poor will suffer the most - as consumers.

This is precisely what happens with protectionism.

What SENSE does this para make to you?

If a farmer who owns land does not want to sell out as he/she knows of no other means, as they rarely possess other skills, refuses to sell out, an unfettered run of market forces can result in an entirely undesirable outcome. As a society, do we really want this? Are we prepared to foot the consequences?

If a farmer "owns" land, it is his. Period. Whether he wants to sell or not is between him - and individual Proprietor - and an individual prospective buyer. Where the FUCK does "society" come into the picture?

Or does "society" to this bozo mean The State?

And what is an "unfettered run of market forces" if properties are peacefully exchanged between two consenting parties?

Padmanabhan implies that an "unfettered State" acquiring anyone and everyone's properties willy-nilly is "moral."

John Locke wrote, "Where there is no property, there is no justice."

And what does "they rarely possess other skills" mean? Are all the MILLIONS of slum-dwellers in all our cities, who have migrated from the verdant countryside, and who sell all kinds of stuff on the streets, "without skills"? Can Padmanabhan drive an auto-rickshaw, even? Or make a vada-pau?

Are India's teeming street-vendors not outstanding examples of "upright and moral behaviour"?

Are they not constantly harassed and preyed upon by petty State functionaries?

In any other country, such constant harassment would have turned people to CRIME. We are fortunate that morality is so strongly ingrained among our poor people - only because we are an "old civilisation" with a deeply-ingrained "commercial culture."

Are these petty State functionaries MORAL?

Or are they THIEVES?

Padmanabhan quotes an "authority" from Harvard to support his immoral views - as if books contain all the knowledge there is. He ought to have "looked around" his own city. Bought stuff from street vendors. Visited the slums.

Anyway, Harvard is but an "extension of the US State."

This guy from Harvard, Michael Sandel, is quoted as follows:

A market economy is a tool—a valuable and effective tool—for organizing productive activity. A market society is a way of life in which market values seep into every aspect of human endeavour. It’s a place where social relations are made over in the image of the market.

Yes, the market is a "tool" - but only for those "regulators" and other State functionaries who aim at "social engineering."

In reality, the market is NOT a tool at all - it is not a screwdriver or a hammer - rather, the market is an OPEN ARENA. This open arena is NOT meant for "organising productive activity" - which is a FACTORY. Rather, the market is an open arena for limitless exchanges between limitless people. There is NO FORCE used in this market - so the term "market forces" is totally inappropriate. All exchanges are consensual and based on voluntarism. The "use of force" is what the State is all about.

This guy from Harvard should study the chapter titled "The Market" - the LONGEST chapter in Ludwig von Mises' Human Action: A Treatise on Economics.

Otherwise, the market economy and the market society are one and the same thing. The chai-wallah, the daroo ka theka, the barber, the tailor, the other shopkeepers we regularly visit to obtain our needs from - these are the "polite society." If this polite society is open to the world - it becomes a Great Society. 

There is no other society at all - unless Padmanabhan thinks going into a government office is "society."

Of course, there is something completely different from the market society - and that is called "political society," comprising politicians, bureaucrats, and representatives of various "special interest groups." 

There is NOTHING MORAL in all their "politicking."

Indeed, Gordon Tullock has clearly shown that the "vote motive" is not morally superior to the "profit motive." Download the eponymous little book here.

Sandel is the sort of western professor referred to in the following quote from Andy Duncan's blog:

Unlike Rome, the West’s intellectuals have defended the spread of the welfare state by means of a system of ethics. It rests on a variation of the Mosaic commandment against theft: “Thou shalt not steal, except by majority vote.” So widespread has this revised commandment been that the electorates in every Western nation will not tolerate its rejection. Yet the economics of the deficits points to the operational failure of the welfare system.

Padmanabhan concludes, quoting his guru Sandel, of course, by issuing a dire warning about "living in a society where everything is up for sale."

Anyway, aren't politicians up for sale? "Horse trading." 

Aren't journalists also up for sale? 

Methinks Padmanabhan himself is already SOLD - to this predatory, socialist STATE.

Another "fool" in the precise Biblical sense: one who is "morally deficient."

"The mouth of a fool invites ruin," warns the Holy Bible.

Recommended reading: My column titled "The Morality of Free Markets" published in July 2009 in Mint.