The Answer to All Modern Problems In Just Less Than 1500 Words

It is high time for some Chestertonian wit. The full essay can be found here.

In all normal civilisations the trader existed and must exist. But in all normal civilisations the trader was the exception; certainly he was never the rule; and most certainly he was never the ruler. The predominance which he has gained in the modern world is the cause of all the disasters of the modern world. The universal habit of humanity has been to produce and consume as part of the same process; largely conducted by the same people in the same place. Sometimes goods were produced and consumed on the same great feudal manor; sometimes even on the same small peasant farm. Sometimes there was a tribute from serfs as yet hardly distinguishable from slaves; sometimes there was a co-operation between free-men which the superficial can hardly distinguish from communism. But none of these many historical methods, whatever their vices or limitations, was strangled in the particular tangle of our own time; because most of the people, for most of the time, were thinking about growing food and then eating it; not entirely about growing food and selling it at the stiffest price to somebody who had nothing to eat. And I for one do not believe that there is any way out of the modern tangle, except to increase the proportion of the people who are living according to the ancient simplicity...

There is a limit to the number of apples a man can eat, and there will probably be a limit, drawn by his rich and healthy hatred of work, to the number of apples which he will produce but cannot eat. But there is no limit to the number of apples he may possibly sell; and he soon becomes a pushing, dexterous and successful Salesman and turns the whole world upside-down.

Exxon has now surpassed Wal-Mart as the new head of the Fortune 500 leader board. Three of the top ten spots are claimed by oil companies, with Chevron at number 4 and Conoco holding onto sixth place. Having paid more than 2.50 a gallon to gas up my Buick this afternoon, I am at least slightly irked.

After all, for all practical purposes, the Big Three--if I may call them this--are guilty of collusion. There are laws and such that prevent price gouging, under-cutting and even collusion. On one hand, this leaves the corporations in an ostensible predicament. It seems that no matter what they do, they could be guilty of violating the laws of the almighty state. The operative word here is seems, and it has become increasingly clear that while it is desirable to have competitors actually competing so that the consumer is able to purchase the best fuel at the lowest price, this vision falls well short of reality, and regulations notwithstanding, the oil companies managed to do just fine, in the sense that Exxon had little trouble amassing 36.1 billion dollars in profits.

Perhaps I am committing another libertarian sin by proposing that at least some regulation is needed. After all, sans governmental authority, we would soon have a genuine plutocracy. Without the checks and balances of the government upon the free market, the market runs wild. Unfortunately, it seems we have a plutocracy anyway. Set up to offset the powers of the corporations, the government has become useless in insuring a genuinely free market. It is probably actually disingenuous to suggest that a genuine free market would need governmental regulation. What is clear however, is that without a balance of powers, or at least a fight for this power, the people will be left to the mercy of the market or the mercy of the state under the guise of the market.

It will be admitted that I offer very few solutions at this point, and certainly no practical ones. It is preposterous to expect the corporations to begin to care less for profit. The only motivation of a capitalist is accruing capital, and while this may be disappointing, it is nonetheless the truth. Occasionally, a CEO may act benevolently, on behalf of his employers or his customers, but this is the exception, and it cannot be counted on as a rule. Wishing corporations to only take what profits are necessary is foolish. Human greed is insatiable, and every man could always conjure up reasons he needs just one more dollar. Capitalism fits wretched human nature like a glove, and unless the hand be severed, it is unlikely the modern capitalist will take up bowling--metaphorically speaking of course.

Likewise, it is unrealistic to expect government to genuinely regulate business. For the business world is rolling in the dough, and in the words of a mock impersonation of Ex-President Nixon by the late Vogel of Sports Talk, "I don't know an American who won't take a good healthy bribe." There are certainly human beings that are resistant--if not immune--to corruption, bur for whatever reason, we continue to elect mouthpieces for the very causes we are most wary of.

There was an old political my wonderful government teacher showed us that satirized the Congress as a millionaires club. I believe this was during the "Golden Age of Capitalism", but as there is "nothing new under the sun", it would seem that Congress is as exclusive as ever, lovable if misguided mavericks like Paul Wells tone notwithstanding.

Perhaps it is only my pessimistic view of human nature which leads me to such a defeatist conclusion. Yet reform is unlikely to come under either a Republican or Democratic banner. Quite simply, the parties have too much invested to risk the disaster that accompanies change.

Our options for change will either take the form Chesterton suggests, a sort of avantgarde agrarianism. Perhaps the moniker neo-agrarian fits. Unfortunately, my skills involve coding a la computer, a trait probably not needed on the community farm. I suppose I could learn how to do something with my hands--besides type.

It is possible that a third party could save us, but there is nothing to prevent even those committed ideologues of the libertarian variety from becoming pathetic Republicrat clones. History has a tendency to repeat itself, especially as cultural malaise leads us to forget the lessons of the past, if we ever learn them in the first place.

This doesn't mean I've gone socialist; I still have my mind and an ability to think at least somewhat lucidly. Libertarianism is still the best ideology, if far from perfect. "The government that governs least governs best", as both Jefferson and Thoreau have allegedly noted. As Vox Day warmly notes, "a person living in the 20th century was 4 times more likely to be killed by his own government than in war or civil war, and 17.3 times more likely to be legally killed by an employee acting on behalf of his legitimate government than to be murdered by a criminal acting on his own." Wal-mart's business practices may be unseemly, and we may be getting gouged at the pump, but the only company that has actually killed people is Planned Parenthood, and I will gladly take the servitude of capitalism run amok than subject to a Soviet Gulag, remembering, however begrudgingly, St. James' command to "count it all joy."

This is where things begin to crash; I've never been terribly good at wrapping things up. I'm not done thinking, even if I've run out of words to say. The prospect of high-tailing it away from society, living in a commune of sorts, existing on a barter system--hopefully--with no Big Brother to be found is inviting if also frightening. The system only exists theoretically at this point, but I see no reason something of the sort Chesterton hints at--and develops further in other writings--couldn't work better than the current system.

I've got two more years of engineering nonsense to earn the precious degree, which confirms that I'm not a total cretin and, more importantly, allow me to get a job that doesn't require me to wear a Wal-Mart name tag. Perhaps then my course will be more apparent. Only time will tell.

Most intriguing is the additional item this could add to my none-too-long list of things I wish my future wife to possess. Not only do I want a Catholic who will home school our many children, but she will also enjoy flipping the bird to society in order to go live off the land. My eccentric plans are still hypothetical at this point, but there's no harm in asking:

Any takers ladies?