It’s a phrase we as Americans have been hearing far too often as of late. Conservatives will tell you their candidate is a lesser of two evils when juxtaposed against the face of a Democrat (and vice versa). But we as intelligent individuals have to look at the principle behind this assumption. If you believe in the doctrine of the “Politics of Skepticism”, posited by Michael Oakeshott and found in the beliefs of John Locke and most of the American founders, you believe that government needs to be restricted because it is inherently evil and if allowed to grow will eventually lead to corruption, death, and tyranny on a grand scale. These “limited government” advocates will have you believe government is a “necessary evil”. How can we, as promoters of a free market and a capitalist system endorse a coercive monopolized system in any capacity?
The principles which we hold dear, that of choice, competition, and quality are constants that are not subjective beliefs that apply only to certain industries and not to others. For example, we don’t believe that the free market would provide superior automobile production but cannot provide a greater system than forced monopoly on food production. This would not only be a contradiction, but it would also be preposterous.
If there is one thing free market economics teaches us it’s that government services are ALWAYS inferior to market alternatives. However, conservatives and liberals alike will tell you that without the force of government people would never be able to agree upon and/or fund police, a military, or a court system. To keep it simple, let us ask ourselves a few questions and use logic to come up with the answers.
1)Is there a need for food? Yes, and the market provides.
2)Is there a need for cars? Yes and the market provides.
3) Is their a need for protection against rain? Yes, and the market provides.
BUT the next questions makes “free market conservatives” contradict their ideology and leaves true libertarians scratching their head.
4) Is there a need for roads? If yes, then why would the market not provide?
5) Is there a need for airport security? If yes, then why would the market not provide?
6)Is there a need for protection and dispute arbitration? If yes, then why would the market not provide?
Imagine the government was in charge of food or automobile production in the US, like they were in the Soviet Union. People in the USSR used to ask their government dissenters, “well if it wasn’t for government, who would supply the bread?”
The principles of the free market are a constant. They are either applied to all services or they are applied to none. Either the ideas behind them are sturdy or they are feeble. Analogously, you can’t believe a Ferrari is the best and most well made car in the world, but only in certain areas. Either it is the best everywhere or it isn’t. Coercive monopoly is already recognized as evil by minarchists and conservative Republicans alike, but somewhere along the line people were duped into believing it was necessary.
How can evil ever be necessary? How can anyone who believes in freedom believe that government can ever be “limited”? The only way to limit evil is to get rid of it, otherwise it is inherent in its nature to spread and then destroy(see cancerous tumors). Following this conclusion, advocators for limited government are unknowingly advocating for a totalitarian state, its necessary conclusion.
The American Republic is lost. This is not the fault of the Democrats nor Republicans, it is not the fault of the conservatives nor the liberals. It is a fault of the evil that government itself is, was, and always will be. Free Market Capitalism has historically been the most efficient system in providing people the ability to bridge the gap between social classes. This is due in total to the principles which underlie it. Emphasizing hard work, efficiency, competition, collaboration, peace, and prosperity have been at the bedrock at what made America so great. It is the evil drops that have been seen as a “necessary” ingredient into the American soup that have poisoned our otherwise delectable bowl of masterful ideas and prodigious practices. Evil is never necessary and must be fought with the same ardent fervor that is mistakenly put into patriotism for government.
We should as products of the American experiment pledge allegiance to the free market, to our people, and to peaceful collaboration over monopolized violence. It is time for us to pick up the intellectual rifles that our forefathers laid down and revolutionize our thinking. We must honor those who have died by advocating for the system that made our country great, not the evil that has intrinsically ruined our country from within. We must be citizens of freedom, not citizens of government. Whether you advocate for gay marriage, less taxes, less police brutality, or more military defense, you do so in the hope of freedom, and you do so in the name of good. There is no such thing as necessary evil. Knowing this, it is now time to pursue the good.