|
A Measure of Freedom by Jim Davies
April 7, 2009 Quite
rightly, we tend to focus here mostly on what is happening today, rather
than long ago. However, to do that all the time is a pity, for it robs us
of historical perspective, which can be quite valuable. For example,
consider: Are we more free today, than our forebears were in the 1900s?
How can we tell? Does it matter? I
think it may matter, because if we can measure changes in human liberty,
we may be able to correlate them with other things that were going on
then, and so deduce reasons for the increases or decreases in liberty over
time. Then, knowing better the factors that cause more or less of it, we
may be able to influence corresponding factors today to increase it here
and now. So I offer a diagram of relative degrees of freedom at four different stages in human history.
It
uses a form of the concept called "Agricultural Surplus." The
thinking is that until we have enough to eat, all else is irrelevant;
there is no life. Once we do have enough to eat, then we can talk about
what happens to our spare time--the surplus. (Other definitions use the
term to mean a literal surplus of food products, available for export
etc.) The left-hand bar in the chart suggests that for the tens of
thousands of years during which modern man was nomadic, eating each day
what he could hunt or gather that day, there was virtually no agricultural
surplus and therefore only a thin sliver of freedom; yes, a person could
wander off and live by himself, but still he'd need to spend most of his
day finding food. There was no writing during this era (though in Then
about 10,000 years ago mankind found a way to cultivate crops; that
is, to stop wandering, live in one place, prepare the soil, plant seeds,
harvest the food and store it for the winter. Dramatic lifestyle change!
It probably happened first near From
then onwards, mankind had some spare time. Not much, I guess, while
planting and harvesting were in process, but at other times in the year he
could lie back and smell the roses and apply himself to other creative
tasks like building a home, digging a deeper well, designing better tools,
weaving fancier clothes, engaging in trade and inventing the wheel: this
was his agricultural surplus. Things were produced additional to food
itself; capitalism had begun. Soon
after that history-changing moment, writing was invented, and from
earliest stone carvings there is evidence of government, so we deduce that
settlement, writing and government all happened in a short space of time;
less than 500 years, perhaps. There is no record of why government
appeared, so we must speculate; Franz Oppenheimer in The
State reckons one group of villagers decided to plunder their
neighbors' crops because that seemed easier than planting and harvesting
their own. Then without even blushing, they announced they would protect
the survivors from marauders. In effect, governments stole the
agricultural surplus, or much of it. The degree of freedom--the time an
ordinary family had to itself, or to use to invest (plow back) for its own
future--was no greater than it had been before the great discovery of
agriculture; poverty remained endemic for another nine millennia, even
while government people went on from one degree of luxurious living to
another. The bigger the agricultural surplus, the more they stole and the
more they wasted. The
next big change came around 1800 AD. Then it was that agricultural science
made its biggest breakthroughs. In less than a century and a half, at
least in the "developed world," people migrated en masse
from farms to factories because ways had been found to greatly boost the
productivity of fields, while machines made it far less labor-intensive to
plant and harvest. All this took place while the populations being
supported and fed by those fields grew by leaps and bounds; in the USA it
shot up from 5.3 million in 1800 to 76 million in 1900, helped much by
immigration, but in the UK and much of Europe also, populations multiplied
in that amazing century. The agricultural surplus suddenly exploded. But
government did not explode, not during that 19th Century. Accordingly the
degree of freedom increased far, far beyond any precedent. It was put to
excellent use; inventions abounded, investment risks were taken and often
rewarded, living standards shot through the roof, wealth multiplied and
was spread widely throughout society--a whole middle class was created
where none had previously existed. Why could this happen--why was
government so slow to grow? Different
reasons, as I see it. In the By
1900 government people realized what a vast opportunity they were missing
and have not looked back since, in the urgent work of stealing an
ever-growing agricultural surplus--so that now, even though it costs even
less to feed the population, the degree of freedom is smaller than it was
in the 19th Century; a smaller fraction of our decisions, and dollars, and
minutes in the day, are ours to enjoy now than they were then. One simple
proof: in 1910, US taxes took less than 10% of what people earned, in
total. Today the grab is just under 50%. Government quintupled, in less
than a century. So
what does this measure--the agricultural surplus, and how much of it
government steals--help guide us about how to increase our liberty? One
answer might be that "we need to get back" to the days of small
government, i.e. Constitutional Rule. Even if there were any credible,
practical way to compel government to abandon four fifths of its power
(there isn't), I disagree with that, on two grounds. First, if somehow it
were successful it would merely place this society where it was in, say,
1825 or 1850; and that was the time after which all the obscene growth of
government took place, despite the finest "limits" mankind had
ever written. Why go back to a situation that history has already
proven to be unstable? Why inflict on our grandchildren the miseries
suffered by our great-grandparents? Then second, the 19th Century was
indeed marvelous compared to all centuries previous--but it was not by any
means ideal, compared to the standard of human liberty. There's a long
list of outrages by government that polluted the 1800s, some of them
featuring in works by Thoreau and Spooner, and most obviously including
the savage slaughter of one American in every 60 in a totally needless
government war. So my suggestion remains, instead, to point to the many positives of 19th Century freedom and insist that it be perfected by removing government from the scene altogether; for if partial freedom is that good, just wait till we enjoy it undiluted! As to the means for accomplishing that: if you haven't already joined, TOLFA awaits your attention and commitment. Jim Davies is a retired businessman in New Hampshire who led the development of an on-line school of liberty in 2006, who expects to experience a free society in his lifetime, and who in 2008 wrote the books "A Vision of Liberty" and " Transition to Liberty." |