Posted by
voice_of_reason on Monday, July 16, 2007 7:51:32 PM
.. when he opined "Greed, for lack of a better word, is good." I realize that he is a fictional character in a movie. And although I don't remember all the details of the movie, ol' Gordo came to a sticky end in the movie - I think that he was eaten by either ET or Godzilla!
Gordo's rather reptilian name (and his untimely passing) are Hollywood's way of convincing us that:
* self-interest is a 'base' instinct in humans
* good humans should practice altruism
* selflessness is virtuous and should be revered
It is no surprise that Hollywood would push the above philosopy. After all,
that is the essence of the Leftist credo - but, observe that it is also eerily reminiscent of most religious teachings.
The fact that it goes against the reality of incentive-driven human action is somehow ignored. In fact, this credo has been used successfully (with religion-inspired altruism as a sort of catalyst / facilitator) to gain
power and
control over others. How ironic is it that Leftists can subvert altruism into a weapon of control and power? How stupid are we that so many of us fall for it?
In the jungle, no one would ask a deer to 'walk, don't run' - for a deer to work against its nature would mean certain death for the deer. But humans are constantly asked to work
against their nature. Unattainable (and actually immoral) altruistic 'ideals' are raised that are contrary to human nature.
Leftists create grandiose schemes such as Public Education & Universal Health Care which cannot possibly work with 'normal' humans. You may ask, what is a 'normal' human in this context? Answer: One who responds to incentives based on self-interest.
When those selfless (actually sacrificial) schemes fail, it is blamed on the 'selfish-gene' that inhabits
only the bodies of the 'greedy conservative sumbiches' among us.
There have been recent examples of anti-gouging prosecution in which high-minded District Attorneys have initiated legal action against individuals who provided gas, food, water, ice and other commodities at 'inflated prices' in the wake of natural disasters.
Those who advocate or prosecute anti-gouging policies are perpetrators of an ugly fraud against individuals and companies that have broken no objective laws (since there is no force employed in the transaction).
Although the ostensible purpose of those District Attorneys is to 'protect' consumers, the end result of anti-gouging policies is to
remove or
reduce the supply of those high-priced commodities at a time of high demand. Price in a free-market system is a messenger, a conveyor of information, and serves to properly allocate a resource to its best use at the prevailing price.
All the altruism in the world could not get ice or drinking water into a disaster zone quickly - but self-interest in the form of the higher prices earned by risk-takers would make that happen. If self-interest were encouraged in our culture (despite the circumstances), the proper role of Govt would be to ensure an orderly market, free from chaos and violence. In reality, there would quickly be enough private suppliers that would mobilize to bring essentials into disaster areas, with the usual competitive forces bringing prices into line quickly.
Unfortunately, even those who believe in 'free-market' principles don't often give too much thought to the underlying moral and ethical principles. When they do, they have to resolve the conflict that it creates with their preconceptions regarding charity and sacrifice.
Note: I recommend the article
"Taking from those in need" on the blog titled "Fletch for Freedom"