Skip to comments.Creative Destructionism
Posted on 10/08/2011 7:24:37 AM PDT by Vintage Freeper
Capitalism has been described as "creative destructionism". Market Based Management (MBM) is a management system built on the logical framework of Austrian economic theory. The path of evolution of a politically effective plan built around the ideas of liberty more closely resembled the creative destructionism of capitalism than a well-organized management plan, but the finished product can readily be described in the terms used to describe MBM. As part of the Great Debate that defines the advantages of capitalism over the liabilities of socialism, one of the primary goals of our politically effective plan is to help people recognize that "politically correct" is not only not hip, but also largely irrational.
Vision: An American Renaissance based on political reforms built around Austrian economic theory and the restoration of the United States Constitution as part of establishing a laissez-faire capitalistic free market.
Virtues and Talents: Freedom, both political and economic are the principles that made America great. Our Reagan Wing candidates and our methods of electing them embrace the best of American Ingenuity.
Knowledge Processes: Explains the contrasts between Austrian economic theory based on Capitalism versus Keynesian economic theory built on socialism and central planning.
Decision Rights: Defines how to successfully leverage the voting power of We the people versus the top down Congressional central planning that has prevailed since 1912.
Incentives: Our method of financing the campaigns of our Reagan Wing candidates tilts the balance of political power toward challengers instead of incumbents in order to overturn Gresham's Political Law.
"We" who? Got a gerbil in your pocket?
Or are you just all wee-wee'd up?
Market Based Management (MBM) is a management system built on the logical framework of Austrian economic theory. The path of evolution of a politically effective plan built around the ideas of liberty more closely resembled the creative destructionism of capitalism than a well-organized management plan, but the finished product can readily be described in the terms used to describe MBM. As part of the Great Debate that defines the advantages of capitalism over the liabilities of socialism, one of the primary goals of our politically effective plan is to help people recognize that "politically correct" is not only not hip, but also largely irrational.
Liberals self-righteously wrap themselves in the mantle of public spirit. They ardently promote policies promising to deliver the poor and oppressed from their latest misery policies which can only find solution in the halls of government. But no matter what issue one examines, over the last fifty plus years, the liberal prescription has almost always been a failure.
Why is this so? Why does virtually every liberal scheme result in ever-increasing public spending while conditions seem to get continually worse? There are a number of reasons:
In short, all develop a vested interest in the programs survival. But if the result is always more and more government, of government, by government, and for government, with no solution in sight, then why do liberals always see government as the solution rather than the problem?
Similarly, liberals use government to promote legislation that imposes mandates on the private sector to provide further benefits for selected groups. But the results are even more disastrous. For example, weighing the laws or stacking the courts to favor unions may provide short term security or higher pay for unionized labor, but has ultimately resulted in the collapse of entire domestic industries.
Another example is health care. The Dems are always trying to impose backdoor socialized medicine with incremental legislation. Why do you suppose American healthcare is in such crisis? Answer: the government has already become too deeply involved. For example, many hospitals are closing their doors because they are overwhelmed with the burden of caring for indigent patients, illegal immigrants and vagrants who must, by law, be admitted like everyone else, despite the fact that they cannot pay for services. Read about it here Destroying Our Health Care. The net result is reduced availability of care for everyone, exactly the opposite of what liberals claim to want.
To further complicate things, liberal jurists and lawyers have created new theories of liability that utilize the legal system as a means to further redistribute income. This too, has resulted in higher costs and prices in affected industries, higher insurance costs, or in some cases, complete elimination of products or services.
Liberals endless pursuit of rights for different groups also does little but create increasing divisions in our society. Liberal policy pits old against young, men against women, ethnic and racial groups against one another, even American citizens against illegal aliens, all in the name of equality. The only result is anger, tension and equal misery for all.
How does any of this improve our lot?
Finally, when companies relocate overseas to avoid the high cost of unionized labor and heavy domestic regulation, liberals sarcastically excoriate them for outsourcing America. Yet, when it comes to certain domestic industries, liberals in Congress suddenly become free marketers and choose to buy from overseas contractors rather than domestic suppliers. This happened most recently with a huge military contract being outrageously awarded to the heavily subsidized European consortium, AIRBUS, over Americas own Boeing. Since liberals claim to be so determined to save the American worker, what gives?
You have to take a step further back and ask some fundamental questions. Why is the liberal public policy record one of such unmitigated disaster? I mean, even the worst batter hits one occasionally. No one bats zero. No one that is, except liberals.
Prior to the Republican takeover in Congress in 1994, Democrats had over fifty years of virtually unbroken power in Congress with substantial majorities most of the time. With all the time and money in the world trillions spent they couldnt fix a single thing, not one. Todays liberal has the same complaints, and the same old tired solutions. Can a group of smart people, studying issue after issue for years on end, with virtually unlimited resources at their command, not come up with a single policy that works? Why are they chronically incapable?
When things go bad all the time, despite the best efforts of all involved, I suggest to you something else is at work something deeper, more malevolent.
I submit to you that it is not a mistake, the failure is deliberate!
There is a method to the madness, and the method even has a name: the Cloward-Piven Strategy. It was first elucidated in the 1960s by a pair of radical leftist Columbia University professors, Richard Andrew Cloward and Frances Fox Piven:
The strategy of forcing political change through orchestrated crisis . the Cloward-Piven Strategy seeks to hasten the fall of capitalism by overloading the government bureaucracy with a flood of impossible demands, thus pushing society into crisis and economic collapse.
[Part II of this article will explore those organizations created to implement the Cloward-Piven strategy and their ties to the presidential candidacy of Barack Obama.]
The Complete Cloward-Piven Series
The Cloward-Piven Strategy, Part I: Manufactured Crisis
The Cloward-Piven Strategy, Part I print copy
The Cloward-Piven Strategy, Part II: Barack Obama and the Strategy of Manufactured Crisis
The Cloward-Piven Strategy, Part II print copy
The Cloward-Piven Strategy, Part III: Conspiracy of the Lemmings
The Cloward-Piven Strategy, Part III print copy
Hate Crimes Legislation Back Door Censorship
Also see (from David Horowitz's DiscoverTheNetworks.org) ...
THE CLOWARD-PIVEN STRATEGY (CPS):
Tuesday, January 05, 2010
By Glenn Beck
Meet Richard Cloward and Francis Fox Piven,
authors of the Cloward-Piven strategy
"I'm going to give you a hard concept to get your arms around: It's the concept that there are people in this country who want to intentionally collapse our economic system."-Glenn Beck
These strategies are taking their toll and seem to be having an effect.
Please explain for readers, now the end results of the communist “Cloward-Piven” strategy to tear down America deliberately, and the end results of so called “free trade”, are different?
"It should be equally obvious that the existence of a division-of-labor society is to the material self-interest of every individual. Whoever, in the words of Mises, prefers wealth to poverty, and life and health to sickness and death, is logically obliged to value the existence of a division-of-labor society and all that depends on. For it is the essential foundation of all significant wealth and the vital contribution made by wealth to man's life health. Take away a division-of-labor society, and production shrivels to the the level of medevil feudalism, with its consequently recurring plagues and famines and resulting average life expectancy of twenty-five years-
"Thus the widely held notion that life in society requires the sacrifice of the individual's self-interest is totally mistaken in regard to a division-of-labor society. That notion applies only in societies characterized by force and plunder..."
"Experience teaches man that cooperative action is more efficient and productive than isolated action of self-sufficient individuals. The natural conditions determining man's life and effort are such that the [p. 158] division of labor increases output per unit of labor expended. These natural facts are:
First: the innate inequality of men with regard to their ability to perform various kinds of labor. Second: the unequal distribution of the nature-given, nonhuman opportunities of production on the surface of the earth. One may as well consider these two facts as one and the same fact, namely, the manifoldness of nature which makes the universe a complex of infinite varieties. If the earth's surface were such that the physical conditions of production were the same at every point and if one man were as equal to all other men as is a circle to another with the same diameter in Euclidian geometry, men would not have embarked upon the division of labor.
There is still a third fact, viz., that there are undertakings whose accomplishment exceeds the forces of a single man and requires the joint effort of several. Some of them require an expenditure of labor which no single man can perform because his capacity to work is not great enough. Others again could be accomplished by individuals; but the time which they would have to devote to the work would be so long that the result would only be attained late and would not compensate for the labor expended. In both cases only joint effort makes it possible to attain the end sought."
Mises addresses free trade in Human Action beginning on page 473 and summarizing on 477-478.
Ross Perot was repeating propaganda when he implied that giant sucking sound shipping American jobs elsewhere was related to capitalism and free trade. Capitalism and free trade create jobs and increase standards of living for all those who participate. The giant sucking sound that shipped American jobs to Mexico and China was not capitalism or free trade; it was socialism. One of our future articles will point out why Social Security should not be a sacred cow when it's actually the Trojan Horse that has shipped American jobs elsewhere.
Perot was right.
You can click this link to download it here.
Henry Hazilitt's Economics in One Lesson can be downloaded as a free pdf by clicking here.
Mises's "Human Action" can be downloaded here.
And Reisman's "CAPITALISM" can be downloaded here.
When you have read and understood them, you will know that Perot was wrong.
You can keep your incorrect theories, thanks all the same.
Perot’s famous “Giant Sucking Sound” reference was singularly prescient, and perhaps the finest yet allegory for the scam inaccurately called “free trade”.
Rarely has any politician, more clearly, stated truth.
Perot was so right.
"Five percent of the people think; ten percent of the people think they think; and the other eighty-five percent would rather die than think." Thomas A. Edison
"Only very few men have the gift of thinking new and original ideas and of changing the traditional body of creeds and doctrines. Common man does not speculate about the great problems. With regard to them he relies upon other people's authority, he behaves as "every decent fellow must behave," he is like a sheep in the herd. It is precisely this intellectual inertia that characterizes a man as a common man." Ludwig von Mises
Creativity is just connecting things. When you ask creative people how they did something, they feel a little guilty because they didnt really do it, they just saw something. It seemed obvious to them after a while. Thats because they were able to connect experiences theyve had and synthesize new things. And the reason they were able to do that was that theyve had more experiences or they have thought more about their experiences than other people. Unfortunately, thats too rare a commodity." Steve Jobs
"Perot was wrong." Vintage Freeper
Perot was right.
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.