| makingmusic476 said: Of course, this raises questions like why do we have governments in the first place? Why do we form societies? Is it not to increase the greater good of the whole? Is it not so that we can be more functional and productive than if we stood alone? If the intent of society is to further the good of the general populace, then do actions like these help in attaining that goal? If the formation of society has nothing to do with that, then why have protective laws at all? Why not return to anarchy centered around "might makes right"? Edit: And I can only imagine how the US would be had the federal government not funded our highway system upon the urging of the Department of Defense. It'd be toll roads galore! And they'd be charging insane fees giving they know people would have no option other than to pay. Their costs per person would've increased and the economic growth of the entire country would've been slowed considerably. |
Well, the creation and development of societies are strongly linked to the creation and development of our morals. Personally, I agree with the Hayekian view that our morals, and thus the societies we created, went through an evolutionary process over the course of thousands of years. The "tribes" who developed the best sets of morals grew and prospored, whilst those based on ideas less than optimal slowly died out, or merged with the better systems.
The argument being that our morals, and therefore our societies, are between instinct and reason. They are greater than instinct, for they have been learned, yet they are before reason, because they were not purposefully, top-down created.
Note that these morals and societies developed not because we liked all their features, but because they were ultimately led to greater progression of humanity. The ideas of the left, and these concepts of "socialism", or what have you, didn't come until much later - until "enlightened" thinkers believed they could design a better system than the one that evolved over the course of history, along with our morals. The problem being that they often fail to distinguish between the seen and the unseen. Sure, more equal pay would be nice, but at the unseen cost of lost wealth and prosperity going into the future.
You see it throughout history, countries and societies grow rich under laissez-faire Governments, with a strong focus on localism (the systems that would have developed naturally). Wealth and new technologies lead to "enlightened" thinkers who get into power and disturb the natural order (whether it be through war or welfare). These enlightened policies ultimately result in the destruction of the society, and a decline in prosperity. A new society is born with a renewed focus on the natural order, until new levels of wealth and technologies are developed (and, you know, this time, it's "different" - self defence didn't account for automatic weapons, protection of property didn't mean third yachts (arguments that another poster has made)).
I'll answer the highway system point later.
