Posted on 04/10/2026 7:15:51 AM PDT by CondoleezzaProtege
Noted libertarian Charles Koch, writing in the Washington Post, argued that he agreed with one claim made by socialist Senator Bernie Sanders: that the system is rigged in favor of the few.
This result, he argues, can only be accomplished when society is experiencing continued, preferably increasing, economic growth. Is there something inherent in the system of natural liberty, or in human nature itself, that is systematically corrupting in ways that undermine its claims of universal benefits? —
[Adam] Smith warned that natural liberty faces natural obstacles in the form of human nature, particularly the desire of especially “merchants and manufacturers” to “rig the system.” They accomplish this self-enriching corruption of free markets by using the power of government to procure for themselves “systems either of preference or of restraint.” In so doing, they impose an “absurd tax on the rest of their fellow-citizens.” These preferences and restraints are what we today call crony capitalism.
For Smith, cronyism fails on two grounds: It is unjust, favoring a few at the expense of the many, and it is destructive of the desired end of political economy—economic growth…
While the concept of a free market may be obvious and simple, its achievement or perpetuation is not. Despite spending much of his book detailing the folly of preferences and restraints, Smith is not sanguine about “completely” removing them: “To expect, indeed, that the freedom of trade should ever be entirely restored in Great Britain, is as absurd as to expect that an Oceana or Utopia should ever be established in it.”
Free markets are neither self-establishing nor self-maintaining. If we are to continue to reap the very real benefits of natural liberty, we must be prepared for a constant political defense against cronyism…
(Excerpt) Read more at heritage.org ...
This is a very cynical view with which I do not agree. Because essentially, you're saying that the people that founded this country did solely for the purpose of being able to raise taxes. I just don't think that makes any logical sense at all considering what they actually did.
Because we see all around us People Who Need to be Governed and the law strictly forbids the average citizen from educating them on the errors of their ways. Since government guards its monopoly on violence so zealously, many think the only option to deal with said People is to expand government - much to the delight of the government.
I was referring to Koch and Sanders.
Yet we have the fundamental paradox:
Those who want big government among us are paranoid to openly admit it: “I love big government”
They keep their masks on. They are outright cowards. They will feign small government at all turns even though small government is something that they hate and it personally offends them.
Why is that?
Why do they consider small government to be a stench, but at the same time wear a small government mask so we can’t see them?
Again just to reiterate, I’m talking about people found on categories such as conservative enclaves. I’m absolutely not talking about MSNBC or DU.
Eisenhower warned of the military-industrial complex. Today we talk about the SWAMP. They are terms that describe the deviation from Capitalism.
DEI is also deviation from Capitalism. Employees and corporations should be paid on useful goods they bring to the table.
But extreme MAGA anti-immigration is also socialist big government and anti-capitalist, which is a free market, including a free market in labor.
Of course, immigrants who murder, rape...DUI, Drunk n Disorderly and immigrants who collect welfare and immigrants who give aid and comfort to terrorists are not free market in labor.
American culture has been corrupted. Capitalism is often blamed for what is not Capitalism.
Currently, the SWAMP is not Capitalism and should be removed like a cancer wherever it occurs.
Thanks for clarifying. Sorry about my misunderstanding.
Bookmark
It it really easier… or just different?
Yep. And I think it’s a fake stat dreamed up by thieving assholes like Bernie Sanders looking for a ways to steal more of our money with their bs socialist schemes.
Who are these “80” people and how many billions does each of them hoard away? Then compare them to the amount of money governments spend every year. You’ll see that those “80” are pikers.
I’m 74, retired from a “white collar” career, but my dad and grandfather taught me just about every “blue collar” trade - and left me all the tools..
I have a huge 130 year-old house, mortgage just about paid off, fixed income, smallish retirement portfolio, - pretty much “house poor”.
A ton of deferred maintenance, because I just refuse to pay contractors for things I can do for a fraction of the cost. But they are things a 74 year old should not be doing.. re-wiring the house, roofing, painting, major plumbing, cabinetry, tree work, auto and major appliance repair - you name it.
These projects are brutal at my age and the ones I haven’t gotten to yet weigh heavy on my mind.
Yes, if I had the money my neighbors have, my life would be a LOT easier.
Of course, I probably have some mental health advantages from doing things myself, working with my hands, feeling grounded and self reliant.. but there is also stress and worry about the future.
Also, I have other talents I could focus on if I could focus on if I had the money - which might be just as rewarding - piano, pool, wood-carving.. to name a few.
Talked with a leader of the (Koch-owned) Georgia-Pacific public relations department years ago; she contended Charles Koch was a nice, grandfatherly type billionaire.
I don't get that impression from reading his book or watching the “creative destruction” his teams bring down on people and communities.
From close-hand observation I can report the GP leaders give the appearance they are too arrogant to know they are dumb. Undoubtedly, they must make billions of dollars but they destroy billions too on bad bets.
The Koch organization is private so it is impossible to know how much they make, or lose.
The Kochs used a part of their fortune in failed attempts to stop Trump; that is one reason I don't think too highly of them. They backed the wrong team, and their attempts to be politically relevant were pathetic. Of all things they were fans of Bernie Sanders.
I think you are right. The United States was not founded that way, which is why I suggested in another post that they founders would have added limits on the government’s ability to tax (particularly property) if it had seen what would end up happening.
So, perhaps the US government wasn’t founded for the sole purpose taxation, and one could say that the declaration of independence was strongly against it, but that “representation” qualifier for taxation sure doesn’t seem to have worked out any better than royal tyranny.
Maybe this result was part of the reason behind Jefferson saying we need a revolution every 25 years. Power is just too tempting and inevitably attracts the wrong kind of people.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.