What is the price of freedom?

'Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty'.

Thomas Jefferson, that stalwart of individual freedom (at least in theory), purportedly said these famous words. Given the somewhat distrustful stance of the founding fathers towards tyrannical governments, having just defeated one after a prolonged armed struggle, it is not hard to construct a context for this phrase. 

But what did he mean, exactly? Was he asking Americans to be vigilant against foreign invaders? Or was he concerned about threats to freedom from within the august borders of America? Who has to be vigilant, and against whom? The Department of Homeland Security could easily use this mantra as it's official motto. After the Boston Bombings, the whole security apparatus came down hard on the city, locking it down, making warrantless house searches, shutting down phone services etc. Weren't they being vigilant, trying to protect the liberties of it's citizens? You could also paste this message outside the gate of NSA's gigantic Data Center in Utah, through which it is estimated a huge percentage of the communication traffic, including calls and emails, is parsed. Add to this frightening infrastructure, the incessant efforts by Congress to create a legal framework justifying this surveillance through SOPA and CISPA, and a rather comprehensive picture begins to emerge. But again, isn't the government simply trying to be 'vigilant', in case a few miscreants among us are planning to rob us of our liberties?

The answer, as always comes down to the nature of Power. Does an individual, or a group of individuals, have the power to rob us of our freedoms?? Sure they can rob us of our lives, but thats not entirely the same thing. The loss of freedom is a loss of choice. Even a hundred bombers, can at most, threaten our lives. But they cannot destroy our ability to choose. For that, they need a structure, a legal entity that forces its will upon the citizenry through laws that operate through perpetuity. They need a government. 

9/11 caused incredible damage to life and property through violence. But its long term consequences were not initiated by al-Qaeda. Osama did not create the TSA. It wasnt Osama that made torture official policy, that continues to this day in the starvation camp of Gitmo. Osama didn't sign the Patriot Act, FISA, NDAA etc. It is these incursions that substitute liberty for security. And so it was this power structure that Jefferson was warning against. 

But a vital question still remains. What forms vigilance? If the government does indeed snap at the heels of liberty, when and what is the appropriate response? I fear the tragedy of current generation lies in the word 'response'. If you are 'responding' to a violation of individual rights, then its already too late. 

Take the case of Anwar al-Awlaki, an American citizen who was droned in Yemen along with his teenage son, also a citizen. He was essentially the head of Human Resources for al-Qaeda. A despicable career if there was one, but not worthy of an unceremonious end without a trial. No moral man would have shed a tear for this person if he had been found guilty by a jury and executed. But no trial was given. No evidence was presented. It was a summary execution, rather an assassination. Leaving aside the moral issues concerning bombing people without a trial on a weekly basis, Awlaki was special because he was still a citizen, not an 'other'. He wasnt armed when he was killed. There was no 'imminent' danger to anybody at the time of his death. So clearly, a legal conundrum has presented itself to the citizens of the USA. Can citizens be assassinated by the government if they are deemed 'enemy combatants'? Could the teenage Boston Bomber have been droned while he hid away in the boat? As police departments across the country begin to add drones to their arsenal, is now the right time to start being vigilant?

No. I'm afraid now is too little, too late. When the government has already crossed the Rubicon, and the media vultures are circling the dying right, it is too late. The time to act was before the government and the media got an opportunity to talk about it. The minute you get to talk about the loss of a particular liberty, you have already started on the narrow dark road to losing it. Americans, whether they realize it or not, have already lost the battle of the drones. Another exigent circumstance, this time on the home land, will be enough to let the local sheriff authorize a strike against a 'terror combatant', nullifying each and every right. Miranda rights? Bah. Lets talk about it. Habeous Corpus? Please. Lets talk about it.

The minute your rights are on prime time television, being deliberated upon by pundits, it is game over. It is too late. You just dont know it yet.

So vigilance, it is not a response. It is a pre-emptive strike at the heart of despotism. It is a prevention, not a cure. It is the price of freedom, and so far, we are failing miserably at it. 

What is capital?

These are polarizing times. Left or right? Right or wrong? People are beginning to realize that the time may have come to choose a side. What is moral? What is constitutional?  

I want to ask a different question. What is capital? As the polemical questions of our times go, this one is often ignored by most, other than perhaps academics and economists. Traditionally, capital is considered aggregate wealth. Wealth of an individual or a business. Wealth of an institution or a nation. Capital is the fuel that is burnt on the altar of human endeavor. It is the grease that keeps the wheels of human productivity rolling.  

But lately, propaganda and policy have unseated this humble and loyal servant of the people with a false God; Demand. Increasingly, public perception now is that capital means nothing without demand. Let us try and bring some light to this issue, and see if we can place our venerable friend back in the driver's seat.  

So the narrative is that businesses operate solely on demand. Unless there is demand for their products or services, a business is sure to fail. A fairly logical and acceptable conclusion on its face. Yet, it fails against reality. Proponents of government spending use this argument to argue against tax cuts, higher economic freedom etc. They claim that since demand will always stay, businesses can be forced legally to tow the government line. As long as demand exists, businesses will too. Regulations then can only do good.  

This is a pernicious argument. Because it puts the cart in front of the horse. Businesses value demand, yes. Their entire models depend on how well they calculate the demand for their products. But government regulations and higher taxes eat into something of limited and critical value: Capital. The consumer may demand the Sun and the Moon, but without capital, not even sliced bread is possible. Innovation and production play an elemental role in the success of a business, much more than demand. Without capital, there is neither.  

The internal combustion engine, the airplane, the computer, the telephone, electricity, the radio, the television and almost everything else we use in our daily lives; none of these were invented because there was a 'demand' for them. Most people didn't even understand the science behind them, much less demand their existence. They were invented and mass produced because of two kinds of people: the Creators and the Investors. Sometimes these were the same person. But most often, they were not. While the creators created, the investors utilized their own precious capital and carefully honed intuition to ensure that the wondrous creations made it to fruition. We should all be thankful to these two very special kind of people, for their effort and courage. Our lives today are a direct result of their passion and foresight.  

Now imagine the Government in control of most of the capital, that they of course acquired through force: laws and taxation. How different our lives would be today, if instead of angel investors and banks, Steves (Jobs and Wozniak) had to plead for a government handout for their creations? This is but the logical conclusion of Government interventions in the market. The more capital they control, the more is wasted, on ill-advised projects and election year promises. Now the Government and their apologists are well aware of this eventuality. Therefore its crucial that the public believe their 'demand' narrative through and through. They will claim that all those inventions happened only because there was a 'demand' for better means of travel, for better communication, better infotainment. These are classic straw men, designed to divert your attention from one basic fact, one we know but are asked to forget: Demand, sirs, is endless. And in itself, worthless.  

I want to live forever. Isn't that the ultimate in demands? I want to see the Universe unharmed. I want....oh, i want. There is enough demand in our hearts to keep the fires of industry burning forever. Yet, businesses fail. All the time. Why? Because capital is precious. And its dwindling. Capital to create, capital to invest, capital to buy worthy products and services. Its not the 'demand' that is falling apart, but the capital that is constantly being crowded out through incredible government spending. Spending on social programs full of trust fund IOUs, spending on unfunded Wars. Capital is constantly being eroded because the savings that once used to fund innovators is now at an all time low. Capital is dying because artificially low interest rates ensure zero savings, and money printing ensures capital devaluation.  

What is capital? It is the most noble consequence of our lives. It is value created through effort and hard work. And when we exchange one value for another, through trade and investment, we create a world where every demand is met. Government doesn't create capital. It appropriates it, and then kills it.

Bribery Is Not Corruption

In economics, the first thing you understand is that Prices are never wrong. You may perceive the price of a good or a service to be too high, or too low. But the price itself is just an indiciator of underlying fundamentals. Its not too high or low. Its exactly what it should be at that moment.

This principle applies to what you eventually pay a bureaucrat or a govt employee as well. The 'high' price (govt mandated salary + bribe) is the price you pay for dealing with a monopoly. The price is not right or wrong. It just is. If you think its too high, you need to understand the fundamentals behind it. Not categorize the price itself as immoral.

Bribery of a government employee is a crude, yet necessary process to make a wasteful, yet powerful organization work for you, in the face of no alternative choices. Bribery is an internal pricing mechanism by which a leaky monopolistic system re-evaluates its initial estimates. Bribery is not corruption.

Corruption in my mind is fraud and theft. When the govt is paid in taxes to perform certain functions, if that capital vanishes before it reaches the workers, that is theft, that is corruption. Is then the worker to be called corrupt for working on a paltry budget and non-existent infrastructure? Are the policemen, postmen, municipal workers, army men and scores of other low and mid level govt employees corrupt for subsisting on wages we wouldnt wish on ourselves, even though the govt collects enough tax revenue from corporations and the people at large to perform said functions with ease and money to spare.

We have never honestly and fully accepted the fact we have given the govt a monopoly over our lives. Yes, we pay their salaries, so they are obligated to provide us services. But we also give them the legal stature of being the sole provider of that service. Make no mistake, as low as his nominal pay might be, your Passport approver is the ONLY man in the known Universe who can give you your passport. The same with ration cards. And driving licenses. And thousands of other services where the govt allows no private competition. The number of these services (industries) has gone down recently due to privatization but not nearly enough. Because the govt does not allow competition, even a peon has power over you. If he 'misplaces' your file, you're done for.

That is INCREDIBLE power in one hand. Bribes are nothing but the premium you pay for dealing with such power. It is inevitable, even in the private industries. Thats why private monopolies (which i personally believe cannot exist without the express support of elements within the govt), are often broken down, and competitive elements are allowed to compete. But instinctively, we have an aversion towards the theory of dismantling the government. 'Privatization of airlines? Absurd.'. Till it goes bankrupt and the govt is forced to do it. And air fares go down and quality of service goes up. Same with telecom. Same story everywhere. Competition increases, prices go down, wages go up. Little to no corruption. Except when the transition happens.

In every monopoly, the consumer has little power. The best it can do is withdraw from the market, not pay for the expensive service. But the govt is a special monoply. You CANNOT withdraw. You have to pay through taxes. And the money vanishes. Into a politician's foreign bank account. Leaving the workers with no recourse but to manually correct the price inequilibrium. They are a monopoly, daily bribery should remind you. Services HAVE to be expensive. Irrespective of what your taxpayer moral code says.

So, bribery is a crude pricing mechanism by which a leaky, wasteful monopolistic system re-evaluates its initial estimates.

Bribery is not corruption.

American Incrementalism

The age of empires never seems to end. Imperialism has made way for a new and potent strategy of subjugation: Incrementalism.

Societies are constantly evolving. Learning from the past. Unfortunately, the Power structure learns from its mistakes, while the people, they have 'short memories'. The Fascist powers of the Second World War had hit upon an old forgotten dictum of ruthless dictatorship. Nationalism based on fear. The fear of enemies, both external and internal. Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin - all emerged simultaneously, complementing and learning from each other. Established systems of governance were systematically dismantled and replaced by authoritarian laws that were slipped into the system while the people were distracted by the threat of an imaginary foe. Civil liberties eroded in a matter of a few years. Free speech, rights to property, rights to a free and fair trial - all overridden by the State in an overwhelming sweep crushing all forms of individual liberty. Goebbles, that master of propaganda, tightly controlled the mainstream press. The German populace was soon awash in State sponsored nationalistic fervor, tinged with fear. The depressed economies made the public easily pliable towards quick-fix populist solutions. All dissent was brutally squashed by the local militia, which later became the dreaded SA and SS. All was going well for the fascists. Till they made their first, possibly their biggest mistake. They went international.

A war on ideologies is a dangerous ploy for governments, since there can be only one clear winner. Fascism or Freedom. Capitalism or Communism. The first destroyed the German Reich. The second dissolved the USSR, though through more of its own inadequacies than any military defeat. Every time a country takes its ideology global using force, it runs the risk of debilitating defeat. Which is why the 'War on Terror' was always going to be a mistake. As war on ideologies go, this was probably the least well defined war in history. There were no clear boundaries to invade, no definite armies to defeat. Even the motive behind the ideology is hotly debated.

Which brings me to the 'why'. So 'Why' did the US go to war..on terror? The answer is it didnt. It went to war on its people. Much before 9/11 was plotted in the caves of Afghanistan.

It is as i said earlier, the power structure is always learning, always evolving, while the people busy themselves in their daily lives. During Vietnam, Americans had had enough of watching their children come home in body bags, from half way across the world, in a war that made as much sense as the one in Iraq. In an unbridled show of freedom from the State's oppression, anti-war protestors had risen all across the nation and soon enough the dogs of war had returned home empty handed and humiliated. The 'military-industrial-complex', the term given to a conglomerate of rich and powerful corporations whose business and raison d'être is War, had learnt a grievous lesson. The only way to wage war is to blindside the people first. For decades, starting from the 70s, the US government, backed by immense financial resources from the Complex, has involved itself in covert military and economic attacks on countries across the world. Be it supporting military dictators in South American and South East Asian countries, the mujaheddin in Afghanistan, bankrolling Pakistani dictators, overthrowing the democratically elected Iranian govt to help UKs oil interests, installing military bases in the Saudi Islamic region....the list is long. Very long. Meanwhile the population at home has been kept increasingly in the dark about these clearly unconstitutional activities. Even before 9/11, most of these acts, when uncovered, were justified as done in 'national interest' and 'national security'.

The truth of the matter is that American imperialism has taken an incremental tone. Instead of going to war all at once, the Complex goes to war in piecemeal fashion. Either covertly or openly, all action is justified because all action is trivialized. It is no big deal to overthrow governments. An apology later suffices for the thousands of people who die because of such action. The american people, a populace raised fiercely on the ideals of freedom, has been brainwashed in such a manner as to make the majorilty hapless and confused. Economic warfare is used on them with such regularity as to numb their sense of the Constitution and the incredible rights it endows them with. Recessions have become an inevitable result of the State constantly using private tools like the Federal Reserve to fund its endless appetite for war and expansion. Today, citizens are responsible for unbelievable individual debt owned by the State, mostly unaware of the enormity of the problem. When economic conditions are'nt enough to divert attention from the State's profligate looting, wars are escalated in order to create the illusion of an immediate threat. Threat levels are raised daily, yellow today, red tomorrow, to keep you on your toes. Laws are passed that make privacy non-existent via increased surveillance (Protect America Act, FISA changes). Basic civil rights like Habeaus Corpus are set aside in the name of national security (Patriot Act). Stasi-like paramilitary forces, not under the direct purview of the Congress and the federal courts, are employed for missions that the military would not want to be held accountable for (Blackwater, now Xe). Since the farce of democratic elections has become apparent, corporations now bid directly with the Complex to get their own President elected (Wall St, Big Oil). The mainstream media is controlled with a leash tight enough to embarrass even Goebbles (Fox, MSNBC, NYTimes, WallSt Journal). The great game of liberal vs conservative is played out every four years to keep the mirage of democracy active, while back channel deals are what decide policy much before the President stands in front of the teleprompter.

Incrementalism has become the new mantra for State imperialism. Every President, and the equally culpable Congress, have over the decades passed laws and undertook policies as to slowly take away power from the hands of the people. Rendition, Blackwater, secret prison camps, torture, 'enemy combatants'.....these terms should send shivers down the spine of every American citizen. Because these will eventually come home. Yet a lot of their anxiety is drowned in the drowsy spirit of commercial consumerism. All their worries are put off by coercing them into malls and asking them to spend their misgivings away. Debt is good. Credit is good. Buy houses and cars you cannot afford. You are an American. You deserve it. Your government will take care of you. They promise. Social security will fund your golden years. Medicare will cradle your health. All is taken care of. All is well.

A perfect storm is brewing. People are beginning to understand. But i fear that the decades long incremental grafting from the American citizen may have taken its toll. If the people have to rise, it must be now. It must be with full understanding of what is happening to them. The Vietnam anti-war protests taught the Complex some important lessons. Maybe it can teach us too. Maybe we can incrementally correct this system. Maybe 'eternal vigilance' is a price that must be paid through principled activism. Its never too late.

Hello World !!!