Saturday, May 18, 2013

Utopianism or How I Would Like to Save the World



Utopianism or How I Would Like to Save the World
By
Martin L. Cowen III

I want to save the world. To do so I will attempt in this essay.

We are recently blessed with wonderful visitors at FOR Pub. Special thanks are due to President Ron for having revived this activity, thus bringing many old friends back to us and providing an easy meeting place for new friends.

We have had in recent months three visitors who have been on spiritual journeys. (Psychologist Nathaniel Branden defines “spiritual” as “of or pertaining to consciousness.”) I myself have been on a spiritual journey and most of us in the Fellowship of Reason have been on spiritual journeys, so draw no negative connotation from this observation.

Sometimes spiritual journeys begin with, or at some point involve, the observation that the world is troubled.

Billions and Billions


The world population is about 7,114,000,000 people today, over seven billion. Among these numbers are people in the various stages of life: infant, child, adolescent, young adult, middle age, mature adult, and senior, each stage with its own problems and pleasures. Among these numbers are people who live under different regimes, ranging from totalitarian to democratic socialism. Some people live in grinding poverty (by American standards). Most Americans and Western Europeans live comfortable middle class lives. Among these numbers are people who are mentally and physically disabled in various ways. The variety and number of people and circumstances are unfathomable.

Slavery


Among the many existent human circumstances is slavery. Yes, there is slavery in the world today. One web site, www.freetheslaves.net, says this: “There are 27 million people in slavery today. They are forced to work without pay, under threat of violence, and they’re unable to walk away.” A map from www.freetheslaves.net shows the following slave states and continents:



Slavery is a big problem.

There are billions of horrible human situations.

The Beautiful

On the other hand, there are countless beautiful things, circumstances, and human actions. Here is “Hunters in the Snow” by Peter Bruegel (1565), one of the most beautiful paintings in the world.



There are beautiful people. Here is a picture of my own beloved son.


In the lives of the people of the world there are beauties, like “Hunters in the Snow” and Lindsey, and there are horrors, like slavery.

To what do you pay attention?


I observe that Utopians tend to focus on the ugly rather than on the beautiful. Furthermore, Utopians tend to focus on the big rather than the small. Slavery in the world is a big, ugly problem. A felled tree across a public street in one’s neighborhood is a small problem.

A big, ugly thing, like slavery, is impossible eliminate. I remember my experience with writer’s block. I vowed to work at least 3 hours a day on my book. Nothing happened. When I changed my goal to 15 minutes per day, bingo! I started writing. Of course, I usually ended up writing more than 15 minutes per day.

The point is that a too-big goal causes paralysis. Having “eliminate world slavery” or “achieve world peace” as a personal goal is impossible and paralyzing.

While human beings can conceive of the infinite, an individual can only act within an arm’s length or a day’s walk. While human beings can conceive of eternity, an individual can only live about 60 years as an adult (from age 20 to age 80). In my sixties now, I can assure you that this is not a long time.

Big Goal Utopianism is like insisting that one write 3 hours per day. The goal is impossible and paralyzing.

Rightly choosing on what to focus is crucial.

Choosing the Beautiful


People go on spiritual journeys because they are experiencing a “dis-ease” of consciousness. The true goal of a spiritual (remember this word means “of or pertaining to consciousness”) journey is to “ease” your consciousness.

Having too-big, unrealistic goals that paralyze one’s body and mind is not the proper path to ease of consciousness or to well-being, or to eudaimonia.

We have recently learned from our study of Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics that the goal of all ethical action is the beautiful. Therefore, one should surround oneself with the beautiful and endeavor in one’s life to create the beautiful. The ultimate experience in the presence of the sublime (the extreme of the beautiful) is wholeness of self, harmony of self, and radiance of self. This experience (wholeness, harmony, radiance) is the goal of all spiritual journeys. Just ask those who have successfully completed their journeys.

Surrounding oneself with the Beautiful


Choosing the beautiful involves at least two activities. The first is to surround oneself with beautiful things, circumstances, and people. Beautiful people are people of good character. Choosing to associate with people of good character is the most important choice an individual can make in order to achieve “ease” of consciousness. An individual of good character is one who possesses virtues: courage, temperance (or moderation), magnificence, generosity, greatness of soul, gentleness, sociability, playfulness, justice, practical judgment, wisdom, and the capacity for friendship. These are some of the virtues identified by Aristotle.

Not among Aristotle’s virtues are these: cleanliness, punctuality, pleasantness, persistence, and honesty. These last five will guarantee one a job, for those still looking for one. J

As friend Larry loves to tell me, “Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.” So be it. One need not choose “Hunters in the Snow” for one’s living room wall. There are many other great and beautiful paintings, musical presentations, theatrical presentations, and dance presentations with which to surround one. Great sporting events are beautiful in the eyes of many beholders. Human greatness abounds. One need only choose to experience it.

Acting toward the Beautiful


Choosing the beautiful involves at least two activities. The second is to act to create the beautiful. I am not speaking of creating “Hunters in the Snow,” though that would be marvelous if one had the capacity. Rather, I am thinking of the usual activities of our everyday lives.

Doctors find disease in their patients and cure it. A beautiful thing. Lawyers find clients who have made a mess in their lives and help them clean it up. A beautiful thing. Software engineers find a problem that needs a solution and code it. A beautiful thing. Parents find their children need an education and provide it. A beautiful thing. Yardmen find grass that needs cutting and mow it. A beautiful thing. Most human activity is action to create the beautiful. A beautiful thing.

Carrying your end of the log


The wanna-be utopian might object that his “big, ugly thing” is in the world and needs fixing. The list of “big, ugly things” is long. Some examples include war, terrorism, torture, slavery, crime (murder, rape, kidnapping, armed robbery, burglary), poverty, racism, sexism, homophobia, bigotry, whale hunting, poaching of elephant tusks in Africa, you name it. This list is endless. Remember, I could not function with the self-imposed goal: to write for 3 hours a day. I could only function with the goal: to write for 15 minutes a day. Applied to “save the whales” or “achieve world peace,” the lesson is that one has to have reasonable, achievable goals. One cannot “save the whales” or “eliminate poverty.” These tasks are too big.

The only thing an individual can do is to “carry her end of the log.” What this means is that one can only do one’s part of the task or tasks she chooses. The bigger the task, the smaller one’s part. In the case of “save the whales,” the best one can reasonably do is to be a financial contributor to Greenpeace. If one is really into “saving the whales,” one might get a job with Greenpeace and devote one’s entire working life to “saving the whales.” However, one cannot “save the whales” by working for Greenpeace and at the same time “eliminate world poverty.” An individual does not have enough time or resources to do both tasks as a full time job. As we said above we can think of infinity of space and eternity of time, but we cannot move an infinite distance or endure an eternal time. An individual’s life has a very specific duration (about 60 adult years) and a limited range (usually only within one or two cities during her life).

Defining your World


Most people are not utopians or even “reasonable” utopians. (A “reasonable” utopian is a monetary contributor to group acting to cure his “big, ugly thing.”) Sure, some tens of thousands of people among the seven billion people in the world act to “save the whales” by donating small amounts to Greenpeace, but, in truth, most people do not spend any time or money on the long list of “big, ugly things” started above.

Most people’s worlds consist of their spouses and their children. Plus, a few good friends and, usually, a small moral community to which they voluntarily adhere (like the Fellowship of Reason).

Within and among their family, friends, and moral community they build beautiful lives and are fountains of value and beauty to those around them.

An individual with a spouse and children does not normally go on a spiritual journey because a family is a fulltime job, loaded with meaning, requiring most of her conscious thought and energy. The family is the natural, automatic source of meaning in human life.

One need not have a spouse and children in order to find meaning and beauty in life. It is just a little harder and requires effort that is more conscious.

All adults have some life experience without a spouse or children. The average age of marriage for men in America is about 29 and for women in America, about 27. Most parents live to have their children grow up and move out of the house. One spouse will survive the other. Therefore, the state of being single with no kids is an almost universal experience for adults. “Dis-ease” of consciousness is common at these times.

The rules for “ease” of consciousness for SINKs (single income, no kids) are stated above: (1) surround yourself with beauty, including beautiful people, and (2) act to achieve the beautiful in your own life, even at the tiniest level of taking a shower every day.

Utopians make the mistake of defining their worlds too widely. “World peace” or “eliminate poverty” is not an achievable individual goal. Happy, healthy children are an achievable individual goal. Performing well in a job that you enjoy is an achievable individual goal. Having and enjoying a few good friends is an achievable individual goal.

Still stuck on that “Big, Ugly Thing?”


Having an unachievable goal that renders one paralyzed has its advantages. If one is paralyzed, one does not have to work. I have at least 10 tasks per day that contribute to my various goals. Ten times 365 (days) times 60 (adult years of life) equals 219,000 lifetime tasks. If one is paralyzed, one need not start or complete 219,000 tasks. Whew! That is a lot of work avoided by being stuck in front of one’s “big, ugly thing.”



Here is a partial list of my daily tasks (with the help of my beloved wife):

  1. Get the kids ready for school (showers, breakfast, clothes, school lunches): 1 hour
  2. Take the kids to school: 1 hour
  3. Teach or prepare to teach high school French: 1 hour
  4. Work at the courthouse: 2 hours
  5. Work on my private cases: 2 hours
  6. Pickup kids from school: 1 ½ hours
  7. Take Alexander to choir: 5 hours (twice a week for choir; on other days we are at home and eat a family dinner)
  8. Get the kids ready for bed: ½ hour
  9. Read, work on FOR projects: 2 hours
  10. Jog (when I get the chance)

My life missions are revealed: happy, healthy children, enjoy French, make a living, work on the Fellowship of Reason, fitness.

I do not have time to “save the whales.” Most people do not.

My point is not that these tasks ought to be another’s, though most people with children live exactly this life. My point is that everyone should choose beautiful things to create and set about creating those things.

Have I saved the world?


Define the “world.” The worlds I am interested in are my own family, friends, and associates through the Fellowship of Reason.

In this essay, I am interested in the “world” of our three visitors who are on spiritual journeys. If I have been “heard, understood, recognized, acknowledged”: HOORAH!, then perhaps I have saved their worlds.

To summarize:

The world is big. There are billions and billions of people. Through the stages of the life of each individual (of those billions and billions), there will be many triumphs and tragedies. In the end each of us dies. There are big, ugly things and there are beautiful things.

Focus on the beautiful. Surround yourself with beauty. Act to create the beautiful.

Carry your end of the log. Do only what you are capable of doing. Do not set goals that are impossible to achieve and thereby paralyze yourself. Do not target any of the big, ugly things in the world that are impossible to change.

Find yourself a spouse or life partner. Find yourself some beautiful friends. Join the Fellowship of Reason.

I have saved the world!

One Last Thing


I have shown you a picture of my beautiful son, Lindsey, above. I have two beautiful sons and a beautiful wife. That which is particularly interesting about Lindsey, in the context of this essay, is that he autistic. He cannot speak. He is only partially potty-trained. He cannot be allowed, unattended, outside a highly protected environment. Yet Lindsey is a beautiful child. He is supremely happy. He is well cared for thanks to his mother and me. He will be well cared for after we are dead by his loving brother. Focus, my friend, on the beautiful.

Do not project your own prejudices about life onto others. I remember visiting Peru some years ago. I saw remarkable poverty previously unknown to me. I saw a 6-year-old child herding cattle beside the road on which passed my tour bus. I saw a mother and children pulling potatoes from a field in front of their one room, mud brick hut. I expect, though, that the people I saw were happy people living full, rich lives.

Friend, carry your end of the log. Your end of log is your own life. Live it well.

Sunday, February 24, 2013

Sur la Beauté

Sur la Beauté
by
Martin L. Cowen III


“For the sake of the Beautiful … is the end that belongs to virtue.” Aristotle

In a previous essay, we introduced the idea that the goal of ethical action is the Beautiful. “The Beautiful as the Ethical.” The Eudaimonist March 2012. In the following essay, the idea will be elaborated with an assortment of observations on the Beautiful.

The five parts I will describe are these: Performance Art, Objectivism and Life as the standard, Being in the present, Work as directed toward the Beautiful, Aristotle on Virtue, and Thomas Aquinas on the Beautiful. These parts, I am suggesting, are related to the Beautiful and Human Action.

Ephemeral Performance Art

Lately I have marveled at the common occurrence of people rehearsing for months to present a play, Romeo and Juliette, for example, on three different performance nights. Three performances and nothing remains except a memory. A live play is completely ephemeral; the event is gone as soon as the curtain comes down. The same is true of a piano recital, a choral performance, a ballet, a symphony, or an opera. Why do people create ephemeral performance art with so short an existence? This creation of the ephemeral is, I thought, quintessentially human, without further elaboration.

Combine this reflection upon the creation of ephemeral performance art with the idea that ethical action is the Beautiful suggests to me a relationship between the two ideas. These two activities, the creation of ephemeral performance art and ethical action are in essence the same activity: human beings creating the Beautiful. In the case of performance art, the creation is a beautiful play, recital, concert, dance, or opera. In the case of ethical action, the creation is a beautiful outcome in human action. Both activities are the creation of the Beautiful.

Middle class and wealthy people, who because of their relative wealth are able to enjoy leisure, spend much of their time in the midst of the Beautiful, for example, by enjoying performance art.

[The Arts were represented in ancient Greece by the nine Muses:

Muse
Domain
Emblem
Calliope
Epic poetry
Writing tablet
Clio
History
Scrolls
Erato
Love poetry
Cithara (musical instrument)
Euterpe
Song and elegiac
Aulos (musical instrument: flute)
Melpomene
Tragedy
Tragic mask
Polyhymnia
Hymns
Veil
Terpsichore
Dance
Lyre
Thalia
Comedy
Comic mask
Urania
Astronomy
Globe and compass

I include this beautiful fact about the Muses for my own pleasure and, hopefully, yours.]

Objectivism/Self-Interest?

In the philosophy of Objectivism, life is the standard of value. Life is the goal of all ethical action.

The Eudaimonist study of beauty and ethics calls the Objectivist position into question.

Consider the virtue of courage. Courage is, for Aristotle, the first virtue. It is the first virtue discussed in the Nicomachean Ethics and it is the paradigm Aristotelian virtue. Here is Aristotle’s statement of courage:

“So one who [WHO] endures or fears what [WHAT] one ought, for the reason [WHY] one ought, as [HOW] one ought, when [WHEN] one ought, and is confident in similar ways, is courageous, since the courageous person undergoes things and acts in accordance with what is worthy and in a way that is proportionate.” Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics1115b16-20.

Aristotle goes on:

“Now the end of any way of being at work is what corresponds to the active condition it comes from, and to a courageous person, courage is a beautiful thing, and so its end is something beautiful as well, since each thing is determine by its end. So it is for the sake of the Beautiful that the courageous person endures and does things that are in accord with courage.” Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics1115b 20-25.

A common argument among Objectivist is whether “life” means “survival at any price” or whether “life” means “the good life.” I have always taken the second position, that life in the Objectivist formula meant the good life. Now I suspect that the philosophically correct answer is that life equals the good life equals the Beautiful. The standard of value and the proper goal of action is not life, but the Beautiful. Ayn Rand was an Aristotelian, but she did not have the benefit of Joe Sachs’ translation of Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics (2002). Ayn Rand died on March 6, 1982, twenty years before the publication. Joe Sachs translates the Greek phase to kalon as the Beautiful. This change from centuries of tradition makes a huge difference in the interpretation of the text. (The old translation rendered to kalon as the noble.)

An example provides a proof of this point. Most people will agree that the virtue of courage sometimes requires that one put one’s life at risk. Sometimes one must choose actual death while enacting courage. The expressions: “he had a beautiful death,” or “that was a beautiful way to die,” capture our sense of such experiences. All parents would trade their lives to save their children’s lives. It would be unseemly (ugly, not beautiful) to run away when one’s children are at risk. Even non-parents will risk and even lose their own lives in order to protect the children under the care. Witness the heroism of the teachers at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut on December 14, 2012.

So, it seems that the Objectivist standard of value, life, might be better formulated as the Beautiful.

Meditation/Being in the Present/”OM”

Self-help books abound. A frequently recurring idea in these texts is the idea of living in the present moment. “Be here now,” I have heard said.

Meditation is an ancient practice of some interest to our present discussion of beauty. “The eternal is in the moment,” if have heard said. The sacred Hindu word is “Om” or aum. The word accompanies and facilitates meditation.

Consider that one reason for staying in the moment or for meditation is the presence of beauty in that moment. We have all experienced the awe and mystery of watching a beautiful sunset or any beautiful landscape or seascape. I remember a particular moment in Provence, France, in the night, when my wife and I, with our hosts, were walking in the hills and chanced to see down the hill into a beautiful blue pool lighted from within the water in which two young people in love were embracing. We were all wordlessly arrested by the lovely scene.

In Goethe’s Faust (Faust: A Tragedy by Wolfgang von Goethe, lines 1692 to 1707) Faust makes this contract with Mephistopheles:

Faust:

If ever I recline, calmed, on a bed of sloth,
You may destroy me then and there.
If ever flattering you should wile me
That in myself I find delight,
If with enjoyment you beguile me,
Then break on me, eternal night!
This bet I offer.

Mephisto:

I accept it.

Faust:

Right.
If to the moment I should say:

Abide, you are so fair—
Put me in fetters on that day,
I wish to perish then, I swear.
Then let the death bell ever toll,
Your service done, you shall be free,
The clock may stop, the hand may fall,
As Time comes to an end for me.

“If to the moment I should say: Abide, you are so fair.”

Faust, the scientist, did not believe in the Beautiful. In the course of the play (Faust I and Faust II) he discovers that the Beautiful does exist and he ultimately utters the fateful words.

I believe that the self-help gurus are advising us to stay in the moment, for a moment, in order to discover the beauty that might be, and that often is, there.

These common practices, meditation and living in the moment, are intimately related to the Beautiful.

Work

Medical doctors are presented with illness and injury. Their goal is to cure the illness and repair the injury. Their activity can be seen as rendering a mess (the illness or the injury) beautiful (healed). Thus, the goal of medicine is the Beautiful.

The same came be said of any profession. Lawyers are presented with legal messes, for example, a breach of contract or a broken marriage or an uncompensated injury or a criminal offense, and the lawyer’s job is to fix the mess. Even a maid, a house cleaner, has the Beautiful as the goal of her job.

Most occupations, perhaps all (?), aim at the Beautiful.

Aristotle on the Virtue of Courage

Aristotle describes the mechanism of virtue in the case of courage: “So one who [WHO] endures or fears what [WHAT] one ought, for the reason [WHY] one ought, as [HOW] one ought, when [WHEN] one ought, and is confident in similar ways, is courageous, since the courageous person undergoes things and acts in accordance with what is worthy and in a way that is proportionate.” Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics1115b16-20.

Who, what, when, where, why, and how—these are the factors must come together to count a human action as virtuous. This circumstance suggests that virtue is an art.

Aristotle goes on:

“Now the end of any way of being at work is what corresponds to the active condition it comes from, and to a courageous person, courage is a beautiful thing, and so its end is something beautiful as well, since each thing is determine by its end. So it is for the sake of the Beautiful that the courageous person endures and does things that are in accord with courage.” Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics1115b 20-25.


This latter comment (“for the sake of the Beautiful”) reinforces the idea that virtue is an art aimed at the Beautiful.

Virtue is therefore difficult because it is an art. Art and virtue are necessarily the products of training from youth (habituation) and a lifetime of experiences.

Integritas, Consonantia, Claritas


What is the Beautiful? St. Thomas Aquinas mentions three principles: wholeness, harmony, radiance. “Three things are needed for beauty, wholeness, harmony and radiance.”

Here is what James Joyce through his character Stephen Dedalus says about these principles in A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man.

[Wholeness]
In order to see that basket, said Stephen, your mind first of all separates the basket from the rest of the visible universe which is not the basket. The first phase of apprehension is a bounding line drawn about the object to be appended. An esthetic image is presented to us either in space or in time. What is audible is present in time, what is visible is present in space. But temporal or spatial, the esthetic image is first luminously apprehended as self-bounded and self-contained upon the immeasurable background of space or time which is not. You apprehend it as one thing. You see it is one whole. You apprehend its wholeness. That is integritas.

…
[Harmony]
Then, said Stephen, you pass from point to point, led by its formal lines; you apprehend it as balanced part against part within its limits; you feel the rhythm of its structure. In other words, the synthesis of immediate perception is followed by the analysis of apprehension. Having first felt that it is one thing you feel now that it is a thing. You apprehend it as complex, multiple, divisible, separable, made up of its parts, the results of its parts and there sum, harmonious. That is consonantia.

…
[Radiance]
The radiance of which he [Aquinas] speaks is the scholastic quidditas, the whatness of a thing. This supreme quality is felt by the artist when the esthetic image is first conceived in his imagination. The mind in that mysterious instant Shelley likened beautifully to a fading coal. The instant wherein that supreme quality of beauty, the clear radiance of the esthetic image, is apprehended luminously by the mind which has been arrest by its wholeness and fascinated by its harmony is the luminous silent stasis of esthetic pleasure, a spiritual state very like to that cardiac condition which the Italian physiologist Luigi Galvani, using a phrase almost as beautiful as Shelley’s, called the enchantment of the heart.

This essay is a musing on the relationship between the Beautiful and Human Action. At present we have only some of the “parts.” Our views on the Beautiful are not yet “whole.” We can claim that these parts have an apparent “harmony” among them as described herein. There is, finally, a certain luminescence (radiance) here present. We approach the Beautiful, n’est-ce pas?

Saturday, December 29, 2012

Arteriosclerosis: The Tragedy of the Greeks



Arteriosclerosis: The Tragedy of the Greeks
By
Martin L. Cowen III

On May 5, 2010, Greek mobs set Martin Bank in Athens on fire murdering three bank employees, including one pregnant woman. The rioters were protesting cuts in Government benefits mandated in exchange for a multi-billion dollar international bailout of the bankrupt Greek economy.

Most mature, and therefore essentially corrupt societies, have in place thousands of programs, designed to buy votes, which have the effect of paralyzing the economy. Once these programs reach numbers in the thousands, the economy starts to die visibly. We are seeing this effect most dramatically in Greece. The effect is visible in other European socialist democracies like Spain and Italy. We in America are being to experience the paralyzing effects of our Government vote-buying programs. Because we are all the beneficiaries of these vote-buying government programs, most of us are unwilling to support stopping our, or anybody else’s, Government programs. “We want our benefits.”

The Wall Street Journal reported on December 18, 2012, that only 3.7 million people of the total 11 million Greek population have jobs. Greek parents are sending their children to live in charitable children’s homes because the parents cannot afford to feed them. Greece is dying of arteriosclerosis of the economy.

Some vote-buying Government programs are small irritants, like the first here listed. Others are more troublesome like the second. In sum, these programs destroy a free market economy completely. The first is milk price supports. In the news today is talk of the “dairy cliff.” Government price supports for milk expire on January 1, 2013, in the absence of Congressional action. Boohoo! Like all price fixing, and there is a lot of this in American law, milk price supports are just one more vote-buying Government program. The second to be mentioned is minimum wage laws. These laws forbid a willing employee and a willing employer from entering into a contract for work at a rate less than that mandated by the Government. This law is a jobs killing nightmare. With the advent of ObamaCare, the effective minimum wage will spike $2,000 per employee per year (this is the new tax per employee of every subsidized employee). For those who cannot do the math, that is a $1 per hour effective increase in the minimum wage law (there are 2,000 working hours in one year).

Rather than list more of the thousands of programs, let us examine the principle. Almost all legislation is designed primarily to influence the financial condition of one or more special interest groups. Not always for the good. Sometimes competing businesses are killed by the Government as a boon to a more favored special interest group. There is always a rationale for legislation that is addressed to the “pubic good,” but the reason is always the financial interest of a constituency. As we learn the principle, remember that powerful interest groups have been educating us for decades in Government schools to believe only the rationales and to ignore the reasons for Government interference. Be prepared for cognitive dissonance.

Legislation can address any point in the profit-loss statement of a special interest group.

Price

In the case of milk price supports, the variable affected is price. Minimum wage laws are price controls.

Demand

ObamaCare famously is requiring everyone to be insured. The variable affected is demand. Demand for insurance will thus be maximized. For this reason, many insurance companies supported the ObamaCare legislation.

Supply

Import quotas and tariffs limit the importation of certain goods or place a fee on their import. The variable affected is supply. Supply is limited by import quotas and import tariffs. More vivid and controversial examples of supply affects are all licensing laws. Lawyers, doctors, pharmacists, all the way down the list of “professions” to hairdressers are licensed. Licensing reduces the supply of people in the profession, thus sustaining prices. The reason for licensing is a Government imposed monopoly in order to benefit those in the licensed professions. The rationale for licensing is public safety.

Cost

The Transportation Security Agency (TSA) now has a Government monopoly on airport security. The cost of security, normally a cost of doing business, is largely borne by the Government and the taxpayers via a direct tax ($2.50 per boarding) on airplane tickets. The variable affected is cost.

So, legislation can and does affect the economic variables of price, demand, supply, and costs in thousands of ways. (Should you doubt this, post a comment suggesting a Government program you think has some other motive and I will respond.)

We have not been trained to think about Government in this way, for a reason. The reason is the continued Government control of everything. If the voting masses actually understood the way Government works, they might not support this manner of Government. We must have the illusion that the Government is acting for the “public good.” It is the best interests of those in power, the Government and the various special interests, to keep the voting masses in ignorance.

In Greece, the voting masses have their Government programs and they will kill to keep them in place. There are many Americans who, likewise, would kill to keep their Government programs in place. We will see riots in America like those in Greece, tragically.

It is doubtful that any outcome other than Armageddon (Ἁρμαγεδών) is possible for the Greeks. They have no economic education. They have no understanding of free enterprise. They have not learned and probably cannot learn that freedom is the protection of private property (life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness) under the rule of law. The proof is that when their Government programs are threatened they burn banks and kill pregnant girls.

But if the Greeks could be educated in the vocabulary and practice of freedom (which, ironically, the Ancient Greeks invented), the Greeks could recover economically.

The recovery scenario is simple. The problem is that in Greece there are rules and regulations for everything, like price controls, minimum wage laws, licensing laws, and other government enforced monopolies. (Can you imagine starting a taxi cab business in Athens, Greece? Or in NYC for that matter.) They have arteriosclerosis of the economy. Nobody is free to act outside the rules and regulations.

On the other hand, there are priceless assets in Greece for which millions of entrepreneurs would pay dearly. The Greek people (when they are not murdering pregnant girls) are a wonderful, hardworking people. Greek weather is great. Greek landscapes are gorgeous. (Who has not dreamed of taking a Greek island vacation?) Greek monuments are the grandest on the Earth (e.g. the Parthenon on the Acropolis, to mention just one). Tourism alone would support the Greek economy on a grand scale. Every Greek citizen could be rich in a free market economy.

If it were legally and socially possible, the Parthenon could be sold to a tour operator and operated at an enormous profit. Other tourist destinations and activities (inter-island transportation, for example) could be operated by for-profit organizations very efficiently. Given renewed civilized behavior of an educated-for-freedom Greek populace, tourists would come flocking back. Currently, tourists stay away because of the threat of riots, protests, and strikes. The barbarians now dominate Greece.

The only problem in Greece is the corrupt Greek government and a corrupted Greek population uneducated in the vocabulary and practice of freedom. Both problems are intractable and the only outcome is the demise of the Greek government and society: Ἁρμαγεδών.

Arteriosclerosis is a common cause of death for human beings. Economic arteriosclerosis is a common cause of death for human societies.