"Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all. We disapprove of state education. Then the socialists say that we are opposed to any education. We object to a state religion. Then the socialists say that we want no religion at all. We object to a state-enforced equality. Then they say that we are against equality. And so on, and so on. It is as if the socialists were to accuse us of not wanting persons to eat because we do not want the state to raise grain." ~ Frederic Bastiat
Today Baghdad, Tomorrow Barsoom?
On January 10th, the London Telegraph, in a story titled 'George W. Bush boldly goes to Mars,' hailed Bush's plans for a manned Mars mission as an expression of 'mankind's loftiest ambitions.' Now I'm as big a fan of space exploration as anyone. I long to see Mars and other planets visited, colonised, even terraformed. I've watched the progress of the latest Mars rover with fascination. Indeed, the need to renounce NASA was probably the biggest hurdle for me in becoming a libertarian originally. But I cannot endorse a space exploration program led by an institution both inept and criminal, and funded by extortion. The Telegraph lectures us: 'To begin such an endeavour at a time when the US government is already running a large budget deficit is, in its way, heroic . . . . It would be nice if those who habitually dismiss the President as selfish and insular would for once acknowledge his largesse.' The terms 'heroic' and 'largesse' would apply if Bush were putting up his own money. When instead he proposes to fleece the taxpayers ' taxpayers already cringing in the shadow of Bush's looming deficits, which dwarf his laughable 'tax cuts' ' the appellations seem grossly misplaced. A nonviolent approach to space exploration is perfectly possible: get the State off the economy's back, thereby freeing up the resources and efficiency of the market sector to fund a cheaper and less militarised private space program. (See the marvelous satire How the West Wasn't Won.) But this would be disaster for the bureaucratic/corporate plutocracy that plans to milk the U.S. taxpayers for billions of dollars. The Telegraph acknowledges that in 'strictly practical terms,' Bush's Mars project makes 'little sense,' but gushes: 'Americans, thank Heaven, do not always think in strictly practical terms.' The Mars mission, we're told, will 'ennoble every member of the human race.' The original meaning of the word 'ennoble' is 'confer an unearned income on special interests by government fiat at the expense of exploited serfs.' Someone's going to get ennobled, alright.