| |
The American Populist Party platform is coalescing around several important concepts. One of the
most important, can be referred to as the "Separation of Business and State".
Think of it exactly like the separation of Church and State. Government is not allowed to "respect
an establishment of religion", but ministers are also not allowed to instruct or encourage their
flock to vote for specific candidates or bills.
We would like to see a similar concept being applied to the relationship between government and
free enterprise. Leave business to the businessmen, they're much better at it than the government is.
On the other hand, constrain business from impacting the peoples' political process, because that
is meddlesome and it causes a great deal of trouble (and it also results in higher consumer costs,
because every
penny of lobbying money is being siphoned from the price of goods on the shelves).
In this model, if there were a wall of separation between business and state, business would gain
some much-appreciated freedom from coercive regulation. In exchange for that though, it would give up
the power to lobby and the power to impact the Peoples' political process. Once again, think of
it exactly like a minister, he can rail all day against social injustices but the one thing he can
not do is say "you should vote for candidate X or bill Y". If he does that, he loses his tax exempt
status, perhaps in the same way that corporations could lose their privilege of limited liability.
This tradeoff would have no impact on the ability of businesses to "inform" our elected representatives,
they simply wouldn't be able to pay any money for the privilege. Similarly, there would be no impact on
the ability of individuals to decide upon (and support) the candidates of their choice. The boundary is simple
and clear, and both sides gain something as long as it is mutually respected.
Constitutionalists will say: "but what about the Commerce Clause"? To which we reply: the original
meaning of the word regulate was to "make regular" - in other words, make uniform or consistent
among the several States. And this model dovetails perfectly with that concept - regulation for the
purpose of regularization is non-discriminatory, and applies to all denominations and ministers equally!
It seems to us that this concept is a win/win for everyone - most especially the American People.
And were it extended in scope to include banking and currency, the People would finally be free
from the clutches of the money masters. Benjamin Franklin said: "The refusal of King George III
to allow the colonies to operate an honest money system, which freed the ordinary man from the
clutches of the money manipulators, was probably the prime cause of the Revolution".
Today, it is generally recognized that government intervention via faulty monetary policy was
one of the primary reasons for the extension of the Great Depression, and supply side
manipulation is equally as dangerous and equally as disruptive! Intervention is intervention, no matter where it starts, and why
it occurs.
Recent events have validated many of the principles and models of the Austrian School of economics.
The Austrian model has accurately predicted the course of the present recession as well as its causes
and outcomes, even its side effects. And there are other models that bear careful consideration as
well, like Daly's steady-state economics. The Austrian model is not purely non-interventionist,
in fact several of its proponents have advocated strong medicine and contrarian measures to
correct recessions, and to prevent them from ever happening. We suggest that such measures
would be better left to natural market forces, because the natural tendency of free markets
is to correct themselves, and interventions only interfere with that process, and slow it down.
We will document this approach extensively and carefully in the immediate future. For now it
is on these pages for your consideration, and for the further development of our platform and
our efforts on behalf of the American People. Currently it is not really government that
has a complete monopoly on currency, because a majority of the Federal Reserve banking system
is owned by a few large corporations. In turn it is these large banks which have undue influence
on the monetary policy that affects peoples' livelihoods and our ability to feed and educate
our children. At the moment this country is 12 trillion dollars in debt, and that doesn't even
begin to tell the whole story. Our unfunded liability is so vast that it exceeds the aggregate
sum of all the world's economies!
We consider that a separation of business and state would be huge win for the American People.
It would free business from the clutches of excessive government regulation, and it would also
free the government from the political manipulation of for-profit enterprises, some of which
are larger and more powerful than the state itself!
In exchange for the privilege of limited liability, and the freedom from coercive economic
regulations, business must agree to refrain from influencing the peoples' political process,
exactly as a minister must refrain from promoting specific candidates. This way, "regulation"
will return to its original meaning of regularization, and the People will no longer
have a fraction of their consumer costs siphoned off for political causes they may or may
not support.
We urge you to consider this concept carefully, and meanwhile we will begin to document it
on these pages and in our pages on economic history. We would very much appreciate your input
on these ideas, you can share your thoughts here or on the
Populist Political Forum.
- Essay by Bill Weston, for the American Populist Party and the People of the United States
| |