Posted by: Greg Huff | June 29, 2010

Free Market vs Government Supremacy

It is being reported that consumer confidence is at an all time low. This means, I suppose, since it has been being indexed. I have not done much research on this but I could also suppose that it is in the same range as that of the Jimmy Carter era.

Carter, of course, just kind of bumbled his way into tanking the economy whereas Obama seems to be making a concerted effort to do this. It could be argued that Obama is trying to save the economy after being dealt a bad hand by the economic meltdown of 2008 but one cannot possibly argue this position if they are a student of history, especially economic history.

There is example after example of statist dictators or democratically elected statist officials devastating their economies. They do this by imposing restrictive regulations on businesses, harsh penalties for violations and the institutional corruption by those in charge of regulating.

The left and their celebrity heroes such as Sean Penn and Danny Glover lionize many of these brutal dictators such as Hugo Chavez and of course Fidel Castro. They ignore the human rights violations, political imprisonment and disappearances of opposition as apparently irrelevant to the social “betterment” of these societies spiraling down to subsistence level.

Compare this with the ogre of the left Augusto José Ramón Pinochet of Chili. Pinochet overthrew the leftist government of Salvador Allende by coup d’etat. Pinochet then did what many other dictators did. He took harsh measures against political opponents. A thousand or more of these were killed. Up to eighty thousand were interned and of these according to investigations done, thirty thousand were tortured. He was a brutal autocrat of the same magnitude as Castro or Stalin.

This is where the similarity ends however. Instead of running the country into the ground, causing the economy to plummet further and grind the population into the same poverty as is usually done by other of his dictatorial brethren, he did something different. He brought in free market economic reforms that totally transformed the Chilean economy to a free and prosperous one and the standard of living from serfdom level to a modern middle class.

Milton Friedman the free market economist described Pinochet’s reforms as “The Miracle of Chile”. Friedman commented: “The Chilean economy did very well, but more important, in the end, the central government, the military junta, was replaced by a democratic society. So the really important thing about the Chilean business is that free markets did work their way in bringing about a free society.”

I will not condone Pinochet’s brutal methods, his killing of people and torturing them but the end product of a more free and certainly highly prosperous society should be an example and ideal to be emulated by the remainder of the South American and other third world countries. But, instead of praising the dictator (like they do with Castro), the left managed to have him arrested in Britain and keep him under house arrest. It is the first time a former government head was arrested under the guise of “universal jurisdiction”
He was released finally on medical grounds and returned to Chile.

Perhaps he should have been put in jail for his crimes but doing this would be unthinkable for darlings of the left such as Castro who’s people have been living under despotism for 50 years.

Chile continues to be prosperous thanks mainly to Pinochet’s economic free market reforms. There are of course other examples of the free market turning around a dead one. One only has to read history to find these.

Obama could turn the U. S. economy around in a couple of years IF he would read history without the data being filtered through his false data and ideology of government supremacy over the individual.

Obama could be a great President if he did this. He could bring the U.S. to new heights of exceptionalism and prosperity. Unfortunately he will, along with his discredited ideas, most probably end up on the trash heap of the history and free market principles he failed to understand.


//
Bookmark and Share

Advertisements

Responses

  1. You are absolutely correct, Obama had the opportunity to be a great President but instead chose to follow the failed Democrat policies of the last 60 plus years.
    If he would set the economy free as opposed to continue to place greater restriction on it, we would be far better off.

  2. And here we have the usual praising of Pinochet with hyperbole and faint damns, the usual attempt to soft-pedal the fact that he tortured and murdered thousand of Chileans (something the legally elected president he overthrew, Salvador Allende, neither did, nor showed any sign of doing) by wildly exaggerating the popularity of Castro and Chavez among American liberals.

    I’ve lived in this hotbed of liberalism, San Francisco, for over twenty years, and in that time I’ve met only one liberal who could be described as embracing Castro as her “darling.” As for Chavez, while he sparked some initial interest among liberals, I’ve not noticed him being “lionized” by many liberals lately. Characterizing either Castro or Chavez as heroes of American liberals is a gross mischaracterization. I’ve just not seen it, and I know many, many liberals.

    And here’s another thing I’ve not seen — even during the last Bush administration, as angry as many Democrats, liberals and leftists got, I did not see gun-waving. There was no rush by liberals and leftists to stockpile weapons. There were no cries for secession from Democratic elected leaders, or even among the rank and file liberals who were demonstrating against the Iraq war. I sure as H*ll didn’t see a trend of liberals trying to rehabilitate the depredations of Stalin, or suggesting, even obliquely, that there was anything to be said for Pol Pot’s approach.

    But that’s what I see now on the right — a growing tendency to offer threats in lieu of argument, along with a growing number of wistful invocations of Pinochet. I’m seeing the repeated implication that the proper reaction to an election not going the way you want it to, the proper reaction to legislation you dislike being passed, is to pull out your gun and start shooting.

    Under Pinochet, Chilean citizens were rounded up, tortured, and murdered for doing precisely what I and my family have done for years as Americans living in a free society — for voicing support for a leader they had elected. And now I’m reading more and more right wing essays about how, oh, sure, the guy was a brute. But once he’d killed enough leftists and liberals, everything was great!

    Why should I regard the people praising Pinochet and comparing Obama to Allende as any less a threat to me and my family than some raving Stalinist who thinks we should be imprisoned or killed for not embracing Communism, or some raving Jihadist who thinks we should be killed for not embracing Allah?

    Is it somehow NOT as bad if the victims of political repression are liberals and leftists? If thousands of Americans end up in mass graves for having been vocal supporters of Obama, will a good economy twenty years down the road make it all worthwhile?

    • I will forgive some of your comments as either naive or just not paying attention.

      You’ll note that I did not soft-pedal anything. I flat out said I did not condone any of his methods. I in fact said that he was a typical dictator in that respect. So, you should probably pay better attention as apparently being steeped in that toxic tea of “liberalism” has colored your perspective.

      That you’ve only met one person who embraced Castro as their “darling” I suppose could be true, but you could not miss people such as Sean Penn, Danny Glover praising Castro and Chavez, other celebrities such as Carlos Santana wearing the ever popular Che Guevara t-shirt or Cameron Diaz sporting a red star on her fashionable bag. Then there was the cute little Mao Christmas ornament displayed on the Whitehouse Christmas tree.

      No, the left does not try to “rehabilitate the depredations” of Stalin or Pol Pot. Stalin is merely not mentioned and is ignored when it comes to the MILLIONS he killed. Hitler was a piker by comparison. Pol Pot is also not mentioned because both Stalin and Pot are kindred spirits with the left. Pol Pot and his reign of unmitigated terror was made possible, in fact was brought about by the far left zealots who engineered the U.S. withdraw from Vietnam, leaving all of those poor people, who trusted the U.S. to keep their promises, to their fate of slaughter. I lay the deaths of ALL of these people at the feet of the American liberal and all of those even further to the left.

      As far as your comments on the left and the Bush administration, gun waiving etc. These are not arguments, only generalities of things you did not see on the left but did see (apparently) on the right.

      I for one have not seen any gun waiving on the so-called right. What, when, where, who did this?

      I do see, continually on the left, violence of all sorts all over the world when they demonstrate (the latest at the G20 Conference in Canada). There has not been one incident of violence perpetrated by those of the so-called right (Tea Party) in recent demonstrations.

      Certainly the victims of the violence perpetrated by Pinochet are not better off since they cannot benefit from the unquestionable bettered standard of living the Chilean people have along with better health and longevity. This result could have been accomplished without the torture and killing of these thousands of people.

      More the point of the essay was to bring into focus the hypocrisy of liberals who will fail to educate people on the evils the murderous tyrants who head up communist governments with resultant mass murders and all of the collateral misery and poverty sanctioned by them. Yet they will be very vocal about the atrocities of those they consider to be on the right. In the 20th century there were 100,000,000 people murdered (more or less) by Communist governments.

      No one but you has suggested this sort of thing will occur in America for supporters of Obama. Given the nature of governing Obama has engaged in however, I do fear if the line is not held on the growth of the federal government that this sort of thing could occur to Obama’s opposition.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Categories

%d bloggers like this: