BREXIT

MISES WIRE: WHY BREXIT IS BETTER FOR BRITAIN…….

The key point is, that the EU is a classic example of the centralization of concentrated power.

isoviha3

That (centralization of concentrated power) is the key element for governmental tyranny to succeed against the civil society, with the chief targets among them being minorities, and the Jew traditionally fares worst among that group.

For a time, the only exception to that rule of small states being better than larger ones, has been the United States. It’s constitution of checks and balances for over a 120 years kept the tyrants at bay. However, since the early 1900’s, the many firewalls placed within it to keep the central government constrained, has been seriously breached by statists of the Left, and the neo-statists of the pseudo conservatives.

That said, while the EU system could never hold a proper candle to the US system of constitutional republicanism, it’s still a hundred times worse than the dysfunctional US system is now. There are no checks and balances against its legislative tyranny, other than a holding of a referendum by the people, on whether to stay in or get the hell out.

NOTE: The US still has hope of recovering, it has an Article V (meeting of states to discuss constitutional changes/amendments) up its sleeve, the EU has nothing.

H/T: 

In The Breakdown of Nations (1957), Kohr points out that small states are more productive and peaceful than large states, and that virtually all political and social problems could be greatly reduced by dissolving large states into a great many small states.

Viewed against Mises’s interventionism critique, and Kohr’s insight that a super-state is the root cause of all economic and political evil, there are strong reasons for Britain to exit the EU, to steer free from an ideology that will not, that cannot, turn out to be successful.

Why Brexit Is Better for Britain

  • brexit
06/19/2016 Thorsten Polleit

On 23 June 2016, the people of Great Britain will vote whether to stay in the European Union (EU) or leave it.

The pro-EU camp argues that leaving the EU will cost Britain dearly in terms of economic prosperity, financial stability, and domestic security. In fact, people are being told that exiting the EU will bring dismal times to Britain.

The anti-EU camp argues that leaving the EU will be good, as it gives Britain freedom to determine its own fate: to decide about taxes, fishing, immigration, and other issues which are of the utmost importance for the economic and political well-being of the British people.

From insights into why an exit from the European Union will be good for Britain, we can consult the work Ludwig von Mises. Essentially, a Brexit will remove another layer of government intervention from the lives of Brits, and in his A Critique of Interventionism, originally published in 1929, Mises argues that whenever the state meddles with the free market, it reduces the standard of living that had prevailed prior to any state intervention (ceteris paribus).

The Evolution of the EU

The EU is a case par excellence illustrating the failure of interventionism. To be fair, in its early stages there was something like the European idea of creating a truly free trade area: a free cross border flow of goods, labor, and capital.

This was basically achieved in the early 1990s. It brought indeed positive effects for growth and employment in basically all European nation states. But the EU’s politics didn’t stop there. It wanted to become more powerful.

In all those years the EU has been working hard to end the system of European federalism in the sense of productively competing sovereign nation states, trying to replace it by a centralized political, economic, and financial superpower in Brussels.

However, the EU’s interventionist approach has brought about a rather dismal situation as far as economic and financial matters in many EU countries are concerned: mass unemployment, public finances in disarray, and miserable growth perspectives.

The height of the EU’s fateful megalomania was the introduction of the euro in 1999: the currencies of nation states entering the European Monetary Union were replaced by a single currency, the euro, issued by a single central bank, the European Central Bank (ECB).

Right from the start, the ECB let loose a colossal debt binge, which has left broken states, banks, and consumers. To cover up the mess, the ECB has lowered rates to below zero and keeps printing money — the only options left for preventing the euro from coming crashing down.

The ECB’s policy doesn’t do any good apart from covering up the problems for a while. The truth is that it causes a shortage of savings and investment, overconsumption and malinvestments on the grandest scale, thereby destroying the very pillars on which prosperity rests.

Despite the dysfunctionality of its centralization path, however, the EU is determined to pursue its current course even more radically: Its advocates a push for “Completing Europe’s Economic and Monetary Union,” basically through “closer coordination of economic policies.”

Small States Are Better

More here.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.