|
The Significance of a Minute by Per Bylund
June
1 was the first day of a number of new political programs and public
policies; another “black” day for those of us advocating freedom
and liberty. The guns of government reached even further into the
ever decreasing sphere of voluntary agreements and spontaneous
order. And, of course, into the taxpayers’ wallets. On
this “Black Wednesday,” a privately owned and managed nuclear
reactor was forcefully shut down, file-sharing of copyrighted media
was prohibited, extra taxes were added to recordable media such as
CDR/CDRW and cassettes, and the owners of restaurants and other
“public areas” were stripped from formulating their own policies
regarding smoking. All of these measures are results of extensive
lobbying from special interests aiming to use the powers of the
State instead of finding a market solution. The
nuclear power plant was shut down as the result of environmentalists
propagating that it is unsafe and harmful for the environment. They
may, of course, be right, but when considering the real effects, one
might wonder what the hell they were thinking. The nuclear reactors
will be replaced to the greater part by a number of coal-burning
plants. Where are the environmental benefits of increasing
pollution? It is hard to understand why the environmentalist
movement never considered demanding an end to state subsidies to
certain power-generating technologies instead. This would be likely
to have caused a market incentive to develop cheaper and cleaner
ways of generating electric power. And it would never have cost the
taxpayers the over one billion euros in damages the state is about
to pay the former owners of the power plants. The
music and movie producing corporations were more fortunate than the
electric power producers. They finally managed to bring about a law
prohibiting all file-sharing and downloading of copyrighted media.
One might argue that copyright is important, but why do they need to
use the guns of government to find a solution? These giant
corporations could easily have stopped the “threat” of
file-sharing through voluntary market measures. The industry
benefits from a global monopoly of the productions of its artists;
it should be possible for them to do something. It is a mystery why they never considered attaching every
purchase of a CD with a contract stating that the buyer is obligated
never to lend, copy or resell its artistic content. This would have
made it easy to find the perpetrators and bring them to
justice—without ever relying on state bureaucracy. As always with
market solutions, it would have been easier, cheaper and far less
dangerous than unleashing the powers of the State. The
extra tax added to all recordable media, which was enforced at the
same time as the prohibition of file-sharing, may be one of the
reasons for this choice of conduct. This tax is supposed to
compensate for losses resulting from file-sharing. Jackpot! The guns
of government prohibiting copyright-violating copying at
taxpayers’ expense and
guaranteeing extra income through taxation. More money in and less
money out—guaranteed by the State. The perfect solution for any
corporation not interested in market or morality. Add
to that the new violation of property rights aimed at restaurant and
pub owners. The anti-smoking lobby joined forces with the
paternalistic public health groups pressuring politicians in order
to achieve a law prohibiting smoking in restaurants. It obviously
restricts the property rights of their owners, who no longer can
offer customers the special atmosphere they might prefer. But what
is private property to forcefully sustaining public health? I for
one would prefer someone smoking calmly at the table to a horde of
smokers rushing in and out to have a cigarette once in a while. The
market solution would be to let the owners decide what to offer and
leave it to the customers to choose what restaurant to endorse.
Instead, government will extend its control organization in order to
maintain the observance of the law. The
nine million people sleeping comfortably during the
“insignificant” minute when May 31 turned into June 1 should
have had nightmares. The world they fell asleep in was very
different from the world they in which they awoke. One insignificant
minute and their freedom was again circumscribed, their tax burden
was increased, and the guns of government gained additional
influence.
Per Bylund is the founder of Anarchism.net and the founding editor of the Swedish Libertarian Forum, a radically libertarian magazine published quarterly. Visit his personal website at www.perbylund.com
|