Inflación, Hiperinflación, Ley de Gresham, y Teoría Cuantitativa

El conocido genio Prusiano Nicolaus Copernicus -Mikolaj Kopernik, en Polaco- en el año 1517, por encargo del Rey Sigismund I de Polonia, finalizo un trabajo titulado “Monetae Cuadendae Ratio” que él escribió como una propuesta para reformar el enredado esquema monetaria que prevalecía en la región bajo dominios del Reino Prusiano. Si bien el Rey no adoptó la propuesta de Copernicus, su trabajo fue considerado por la Asamblea Real Prusiana en el año 1522, y luego publicado en el año 1526. Copernicus, con este trabajo, hizo importantes contribuciones al pensamiento monetario, pero dos de ellas sobresalen: 1-fortaleció la exposición de la Ley de Gresham, y 2- expuso por primera vez la Teoría Cuantitativa del Dinero. -Mire todo el documento pdf-.

Read All... Leer Todo...

Significancia Epistemológica del Juicio Sintético A Priori

Un "juicio sintético⁽¹⁾ a priori⁽²⁾" es un juicio -un enunciado- portador de nuevo conocimiento -sintético- que es completa, necesaria, y absolutamente independiente de toda experiencia -a priori⁽³⁾-. Estos juicios comunican conocimiento que la propia facultad cognitiva de la mente ofrece de sí misma sin participación de impresión sensorial alguna. Inmanuel Kant con su famosa obra "The Critique of Pure Reason" aborda con éxito el desafío de exponer esta ampliación del espectro cognitivo de la mente humana a niveles de razonamiento que trascienden los sentidos. Él logra fundamentar y probar la significancia epistemológica de estos juicios en cuya síntesis no intervienen los sentidos. La tarea que aquí propongo a continuación es probar, con pura lógica, la existencia -es decir la significancia epistemológica- de esta categoría de juicios sin recurrir con detalle a la extensa e impecable argumentación propuesta por Kant.

En primer lugar propongo un juicio sobre los juicios sintéticos a priori, y a continuación se prueba el valor de verdad de este juicio.

El juicio propuesto dice:

[1] "Hay juicios sintéticos a priori."

Su demostración es:

----------
Suponga que [2] "Todo juicio a priori es no sintético -o sea analítico-."

El juicio [2] no puede ser a priori porque en tal caso pierde significado epistemológico ya que deja⁽⁴⁾ de ser un juicio acerca de todos los juicios, pues él mismo tendría que ser un juicio a priori no sintético. Luego queda suponer que [2] es empírico. Con [2] empírico y dado que la experiencia⁽⁵⁾ en sí carece de estricta universalidad⁽⁶⁾ que garantice la completa validez de [2] entonces su única garantía de validez supone que toda experiencia lo confirma, lo cual es equivalente a suponer que [2] es necesaria, completa, y absolutamente independiente de toda experiencia, o sea a priori, con lo cual [2] recurre en la insignificancia epistemológica. En cualquier caso, [2] es en sí insignificante por lo que es falso, lo que confirma la verdad de [1].
----------

La irrevocable verdad de [1], o falsedad de [2], confirma el estatus epistemológico del juicio sintético a priori: hay al menos un juicio sintético a priori. Y si hay uno, nada impide que haya dos, tres, y así sucesivamente, con lo cual se abre la posibilidad para extender indefinidamente la fuente de conocimiento de la mente sin requerir de la experiencia. Como señala Kant, ha quedado establecido que la mente del hombre posee y ejerce la facultad de conocimiento a priori. Cada vez que la mente de un hombre se encuentre con un juicio sintético y desee averiguar si es “a priori” -sintetizado exclusivamente por la intervención de la mente- lo único que tendrá que hacer es aplicarle al juicio el test Kantiano⁽⁷⁾ de necesidad o universalidad; estos tests son infalibles y equivalentes en su veredicto por lo que si se cumple uno entonces se cumple el otro; cualquiera de ellos es igualmente válido.

Sobre la base de esta clase de juicios, Ludwing von Mises construye toda la praxeología -la teoría de la acción humana. Es más, Mises postula un único axioma -necesaria, completa, y absolutamente presente en toda mente humana- para deducir de ahí toda esa teoría. Ese axioma se llama axioma de acción humana y dice: "human acts". Como consecuencia lógica de ese enunciado sintético a priori de dos palabras, Mises deriva toda la teoría económica que es la rama más desarrollada de la praxeología. De este modo Mises demuestra que la experiencia es necesaria, completa, y absolutamente irrelevante para la teoría económica, pues la economía es una ciencia a priori.

Referencias

Kant, Inmanuel. 2012. "The Critique of Pure Reason". [CPR]. The Project Gutenberg Ebook of The Critique of Pure Reason.
.
Mises, Ludwig von. 1998. "Human Action – A Treatise on Economics". [HA]. Ludwig von Mises Institute, Auburn, Alabama. USA.
.
Notas al Pié

(1) Un juicio sintético es aquel que agrega nuevo conocimiento. Kant, en CPR páginas 28 y 29 dice: "...In all judgements wherein the relation of a subject to the predicate is cogitated (I mention affirmative judgements only here; the application to negative will be very easy), this relation is possible in two different ways. Either the predicate B belongs to the subject A, as somewhat which is contained (though covertly) in the conception A; or the predicate B lies completely out of the conception A, although it stands in connection with it. In the first instance, I term the judgement analytical, in the second, synthetical. Analytical judgements (affirmative) are therefore those in which the connection of the predicate with the subject is cogitated through identity; those in which this connection is cogitated without identity, are called synthetical judgements. The former may be called explicative, the latter augmentative judgements..."

(2) Kant, en CPR página 25, así inicia su estudio sobre un juicio a priori: "...It is, therefore, a question which requires close investigation, and not to be answered at first sight, whether there exists a knowledge altogether independent of experience, and even of all sensuous impressions? Knowledge of this kind is called a priori, in contradistinction to empirical knowledge, which has its sources a posteriori, that is, in experience..." Luego Kan agrega: "...By the term "knowledge a priori," therefore, we shall in the sequel understand, not such as is independent of this or that kind of experience, but such as is absolutely so of all experience. Opposed to this is empirical knowledge, or that which is possible only a posteriori, that is, through experience..."

(3) Kant, en CPR páginas 25 y 26, dice: "...Knowledge a priori is either pure or impure. Pure knowledge a priori is that with which no empirical element is mixed up. For example, the proposition, "Every change has a cause," is a proposition a priori, but impure, because change is a conception which can only be derived from experience...". "...Now, in the first place, if we have a proposition which contains the idea of necessity in its very conception, it is a if, moreover, it is notderived from any other proposition, unless from one equally involving the idea of necessity, it is absolutely a priori. Secondly, an empirical judgement never exhibits strict and absolute, but only assumed and comparative universality (by induction); therefore, the most we can say is so far as we have hitherto observed, there is no exception to this or that rule. If, on the other hand, a judgement carries with it strict and absolute universality, that is, admits of no possible exception, it is not derived from experience, but is valid absolutely a priori..."

(4) Para quienes no están acostumbrados a demostrar enunciados usando lógica no les resultará convincente la idea que un juicio acerca de una totalidad no es tal. Por eso déjeme agregar aquí una interpretación que, sin ser metafísica, es algo extravagante. Suponer que [2] es a priori analítico, quiere decir que este juicio es parte de otro juicio que lo contiene, del cual forma parte de modo que al analizarlo -al explicar en detalle su significado- se obtiene [2].Hasta ahí todo va bien. El inconveniente surge cuando uno se pregunta cuál es el estatus del juicio que contiene a [2]. La respuesta a esto es que ese juicio debe ser distinto de [2] porque si fuera igual [2] dejaría de ser analítico; es a priori porque si fuera empírico carecería de validez universal; y es analítico porque si fuera sintético contradiría [2] . Por lo tanto el juicio que contiene a [2] es distinto de [2] y además es a priori analítico. Con lo cual hay otro que lo contiene, que a su vez es distinto y a priori analítico; y así sucesivamente hay indefinidos juicios con esta misma característica. Es decir esta secuencia de juicios, todos distintos y a priori analíticos, no tiene último elemento. Por lo tanto no hay manera de garantizar la propiedad que se quiere probar más que suponiendo la existencia de un último elemento a priori analítico. No quedan dudas que ese último elemento, de existir, es a priori porque sólo se pudo obtener suponiendo validez universal lo cual caracteriza a un juicio a priori. Pero ese último elemento, de existir, no puede ser analítico porque es último, no hay otro que lo contenga. Luego ese último elemento es sintético, con lo cual existe un juicio a priori sintético que es lo que [2] está negando. El absurdo proviene de suponer que [2] es a priori analítico. Finalmente queda como única posibilidad que si [2] es a priori entonces es sintético, que es lo que [2] pretende negar.

(5) Kant, en CPR páginas 25 y 26, al tratar la distinción entre un juicio puro y uno empírico dice: "...Empirical universality is, therefore, only an arbitrary extension of validity, from that which may be predicated of a proposition valid in most cases, to that which is asserted of a proposition which holds good in all; as, for example, in the affirmation, "all bodies are heavy."..." Obviamente, lo que afirma el último enunciado es válido para todos los casos, o sea es estrictamente universal.

(6) Kant, en CPR página 26, dice: "...When, on the contrary, strict universality characterizes a judgement, it necessarily indicates another peculiar source of knowledge, namely, a faculty of cognition a priori..."

(7) Kant, en CPR página 26, expone la distinción entre puro y empírico, y además agrega: "...But,for the present, we may content ourselves with having established the fact, that we do possess and exercise a faculty of pure a priori cognition; and, secondly, with having pointed out the proper tests of such cognition, namely, universality and necessity..." Read All... Leer Todo...

Importancia Suprema de la Propiedad

Para Bastiat, la vida de un ser humano queda determinada por su existencia, su libertad, y su propiedad. Estos tres aspectos definen precisamente a un ser humano, constituyen los derechos básicos del hombre, son parte de los regalos asociados a su ser. Interpretando a Bastiat uno entiende que la existencia de una persona es el pleno despliegue de su personalidad; la libertad consiste en el pleno ejercicio de las aptitudes que emanan de su personalidad; y la propiedad se deriva de la plena disposición de los bienes o logros que la persona obtiene al ejercer las aptitudes que expresan su personalidad. Toda esta plenitud son sus derechos fundamentales; el hombre mismo es su individualidad, su libertad, y su propiedad; estos regalos naturales son hechos y derechos que preceden y superan a toda creación humana. Mire todo el documento pdf.

Read All... Leer Todo...

La Gran Mentira del Calentamiento Global

David M.W. Evans, el 24 de Febrero pasado, ha publicado una contundente nota en donde expone de modo impecable sus argumentos para rebatir la idea sobre el calentamiento global. Desde esta nota de Evans se puede concluir que el planeta tierra “no” se está calentando tal como lo predijo James Hansen (el padre de la idea del calentamiento global) en 1988, y como lo predicen los modelos elaborados por científicos del Panel Intergubernamental del Cambio Climático (IPCC, por sus siglas en ingles) en 1990.

Es más, según evidencias de los últimos 500 años hoy acopiada por científicos escépticos al calentamiento de la tierra, la temperatura del aire y de los océanos terrestres oscila cíclicamente debido a causas aún no identificadas. Además, al comparar las predicciones realizadas por los modelos climáticos con datos confiables -no falsificados- recolectados en los últimos 20 años sobre el clima terrestre se puede concluir que: políticos, científicos, organizaciones gubernamentales, y organizaciones civiles, quienes impulsan el fundamentalismo del calentamiento global, han montado un escenario ficticio para transmitir a la sociedad esta falsa noción -del calentamiento global- que hace rato ha quedado al descubierto como una farsa y una gran estafa pública.

En este mismo blog, el día 4 de Diciembre del 2009, he dedicado una nota para describir parte del escándalo climático de ese momento que se hacía llamar como "climategate" y que James Delingpole resumió es su nota del 20 de Noviembre de ese año. Lo que en ese entonces se descubrió fue la punta de un ovillo, una madeja enredada de corrupción académica: con académicos inventando, falsificando, y ocultando cifras y hechos con el fin de ganar dinero pagado por otras personalidades tan corruptas como ellos quienes pretenden amasar fortunas estafando a toda la población civil del mundo. Dentro de ese espectro de estafadores sobresalen tanto académicos, como gobernantes, como hombres de negocios oscuros, y como organizaciones civiles que se hacen llamar 'sin fines de lucro'. Es un verdadero monstruo de cuatro cabezas.

Lo importante hoy en día es que se sabe que el cambio climático de la tierra "no" es tal, ya que se trata de una gran farsa. Las pruebas de esta estafa, abundan. Más allá de los mails y documentos derivados del climategate, hoy se suma la evidencia aportada por más de 20 años de datos verdaderos y confiables que contradicen las predicciones del modelo de cambio climático. Este modelo predice aumentos en la temperatura del aire que están -en el mejor de los casos- muy por arriba de lo observado, predice disminuciones de la radiación emitida por la tierra cuando estas emisiones se han incrementado constantemente, predice la formación de puntos calientes en la atmósfera cuando estos puntos no existen hoy en día, y predice incrementos en la temperatura del océano que jamás ocurrieron. O sea, las predicciones del modelo son un fiasco.

Siguiendo las explicaciones de Evans, y del grupo de escépticos, se concluye que las fallas del modelo se deben a la sobre-estimación del efecto feedback de la atmósfera. El efecto feedback es la respuesta térmica de la atmósfera al incremento en su concentración de CO2. El modelo supone que este efecto triplica al efecto directo que el aumento en la concentración de CO2 tiene sobre la temperatura del aire; mientras que los escépticos, y la realidad observada, indican que este efecto reduce a la mitad el efecto directo. Entonces el efecto directo, en lugar de triplicarse por el feedback, se reduce a la mitad. Esto tiene consecuencias drásticas sobre las predicciones del modelo, y las vuelve erróneas.

Evans explica que tal respuesta -feedback- es esperable en esta clase de sistemas que son persistentes y estables en largos periodos de tiempo. La lógica de esta idea sostiene que si un sistema complejo ha de ser estable en el tiempo entonces este debe amortiguar más que amplificar los efectos perturbadores de esa estabilidad, en caso contrario se vuelve inestable y entonces no podría persistir, lo cual es una contradicción. Esta característica de la persistencia se observa en complejos sistemas eléctricos bien estudiados.

La atmósfera terrestre es un sistema muy complejo y, a juzgar por los 4 billones de años que lleva su existencia, muy estable. La tierra ha sufrido durante su larga vida toda clase de ataques cósmicos violentos. Basta mencionar el que hizo desaparecer a los dinosaurios para tener una idea de la magnitud de esos eventos. Pero aún así, su atmósfera siempre se ha recuperado y restituido. Es asombrosa la capacidad que tiene la atmósfera de la tierra para amortiguar y, eventualmente, anular los efectos perturbadores. A la larga, la misma dinámica atmosférica corrige esos efectos perturbadores y los utiliza para fortalecer su propia estabilidad. Ese es el verdadero carácter de la estabilidad.

Si uno se da cuenta de este carácter, y reflexiona sobre su alcance, podrá entender que los humanos de hecho tienen habilidad y capacidad para perturbar la atmósfera del planeta; pero también podrá entender que el accionar humano perturbador del clima es limitado, y que los efectos climáticos destructivos de esto casi siempre serán amortiguados más que amplificados. También podrá entender que la vida de los hombres en este planeta recibe más amenazas desde el exterior no terrestre que desde su propio accionar. Afirmar que el hombre tiene la capacidad para destruir la atmósfera de la tierra contradice las verdaderas implicaciones de la vida sobre este planeta. Parte de esas implicaciones se vinculan con la persistente estabilidad de la atmósfera, sin lo cual la evolución de la vida a lo largo de 4 billones de años no habría ocurrido.

¿Qué queda entonces decir sobre el calentamiento global?. Tal como se ha planteado, por causas antrópicas, es falso. De ocurrir un calentamiento, no ocurrirá del modo en que unos pseudo académicos farsantes y estafadores -que arreglan informes a cambio de dinero- lo andan predicando por todo el mundo. Entonces esa triste idea que estos señores predican es "La Gran Mentira del Calentamiento Global".

Atte. Juan Carlos Vera.
Buenos Aires, Argentina. Read All... Leer Todo...

A New Spontaneous Monetary System

We know, as a priori revelation, that an observed persistent order in a transcendental complexity -in its very very vast finitude, or its vast infinitude- only arises spontaneously. There is no place for a command-control center in such subtle organization. The vastness of this complexity will erect an unbeatable boundary which precludes all sort of successful centralized organization into this complexity. If an organized complexity is called to exit and persist, then all entire dominance of its vastness tips the balance in favor of a decentralized organization. Why?.

One of the key reasons why a centralized solution is not a possible one is due to the fact that in this kind of phenomena it has been lost the principle of simultaneity. Doesn't exist some simultaneous events. For example doesn't exist the simultaneity between the state of a complexity and its eventual instantaneous interpretation and therefore commands issued to change the state. So the interpreted state obtained at the time of observation could be not the same state of the complexity at the time of issuing commands to change, or not, the state; therefore a sequence of centralized interventions could not converge to a desired organization or, if converge to some one, it wouldn't be possible determinate their certain causes and the effectiveness of commands.

It is simply impossible that from a central entity arises an arrange of vasts aspects -of vasts elements of a reality- to obtain all relevant information of such complexity, to process such information, and then to issue all elaborated and specific commands to each elements while the observed state remains fixed. The elapsed time between the observation time and the issued commands time is not a void time, and the state of the complexity may change along it; thus the information gathered about of state of the complexity becomes irrelevant to organizational ends.

In a social organization this limitation for centralization is clear. For example when Hayek, correctly, says that such supposed given information for an economic central planner isn't never given at all -while it is imperfect, incomplete, some time wrong, or biased pieces of information- he is accepting that no one individual in a society has the ability and capacity to obtain and harness a so complex and vast pile of information about of each from infinite aspect of the real world; and so no one central planner has such ability and capacity too. The piece of time demanded to obtain and harness such pile of information will be enough to turn this information into irrelevant. In this way any attempt of an individual to gather a detailed prospect of the reality is doomed to fail. So each individual is naturally forced to gather only a vary small, incomplete, and imperfect portion of dispersed information which will be used to understand "his or her" relevant world to make "his or her" feasible economic and social decisions.

All transcendental complexity is, fortunately, doomed to a not central persistent organization. In general, any transcendental complex order must be a decentralized one. In particular, a persistent order in a social complexity will be decentralized. The history of the more important and persistent economic institutions for the prosperity of the mankind are only some manifestation of such true sentence. Some undeniable examples are: the true rule of law, the private property rights, the free market economics, the governance rules, and the money. We are witnesses that all attempt made for controlling or centralizing these institutions has induced evident social or economic catastrophes. The utter destruction of money institution is something that the mankind has been making in the past one hundred years. The total central control of the money which has been imposed from the governments powers around the world can illuminate us about the consequences of destructing a decentralized complexity.

The monetary spontaneous order -free monetary system- derived from the social effort of decentralized cooperation among million of people, has been now replaced by a centralized fiat monetary system imposed coercively and commanded from the state, -from the government-. The money system which emerged from an spontaneous order, like an institution to support and promote economic prosperity in a society, has been turned into a coercive central instrument to defraud people and destroy economic prosperity. The relevant decentralized information that each people use to make an spontaneous monetary order has been annulled and replaced by information supposed relevant only for a central banker, or a president of a country or a reduced group of friends, whose -like a central planner- are trying to take total control over a vast and incontrollable complexity. The final fate is known: its total fail.

The solution to this trouble is a natural restitution of spontaneous monetary order. But the means that the society has to restore this order not looks so clear. I have heard the logical idea that it should be withdrawn the central control powers from the government, to be restored to each individual on the society. I have heard too that a shocking revolution could reach this end and I have wrote something like that in a precedent post when I'm talking about of a “great revolution”.

I think that this last expression "...a great revolution..." has a sense not only of a logical revolution but mainly of an spontaneous revolution. An spontaneous revolution here means that the only mean that the mankind has to restore a broken spontaneity is a new spontaneity. So the only mean to restore the sound money is through a new spontaneous money. If people wish sound money they must, in spontaneous cooperation, meet the challenge to build a new monetary system. An spontaneous side order that overcome to the dying coercive central fiat monetary system. So the solution of the restitution of the spontaneous monetary order is A New Spontaneous Monetary System. Read All... Leer Todo...

The EURO Must Die

Imagine you a world which is dominated by a single imposed fiat money. A world where a cult of privileged men has a total control over the money that all people on the earth are forced to use. A world where this sect has a supper monopoly throughout which it controls the use and issues of a single fiat money. A world where generally, a single man, would decide the quantity of money and the arbitrary distribution of such issued money among seven billion of peoples. Surely such a controlled world would look like a world with seven billion, but one, slaves. That is the meaning of final implications of the fiat monetary system: to enslave people.

We know that a slavery world -like socialism or communism- is the worst of all social organizations. At the beginning let me make an ask: why the fiat monetary system leads to social slavery?. The resounding answer is that such monetary system overrides freedom of people while they aren't free to choice money. In a social organization while people aren't free to choice money they aren't free to choice anything because all other thing are interchanged, one and others, and valued using money. The quality to choice money is a transitive property given that the money is a mean of payment. But the more important fact is that the quality of liberty is a transitive property too. So, if someone hasn't a full exercise of his or her aptitudes, then he or she hasn't a full disposition of his or her goods, not a full deployment of his or her personality. In other words, he or she is like a slave.

So, a society living with a fiat money system is a pseudo-free society. If a society isn't free to choice anything they don't live in a capitalist economics organization. Then, like Ludwig von Mises has said, a not capitalist society is a socialist one. The fiat money is a governance instrument of the socialism. Under fiat system the government has the power to determine the quantity of money, it has the power to force all people to use it, and it can issue money to meet the harmful demands and to benefit particular groups.

In this way, government create inflation because this additional issued money doesn't cover a sound rise in the economic demand for money but serves sectional interests. In this way the value of money -and therefore the value of all economic goods- is given by the coercive power of state and not by free people acting in a free market. This is a socialism system for the simple fact that it is the state, and not free people exercising all their rights of ownership, which has the power to determine the value of all the pile of economic goods. That it is the state which has the last properties rights of all economic goods in a similar way that Hans-Hermann Hoppe calls the fiat property rights.

The EURO -the common fiat money of a vast collection of European countries- is an attempt to generalize a unique fiat money monopoly over a vast social diversity. It is an attempt to limit the natural predisposition of each country -predisposition of all people who live there- to choice their own money and to use all these moneys to compete one and others and so to preserve the value of such moneys. Then, the EURO is a perverse attempt to dominate and to slave all European society, it is an attempt to induce a process of wealth accumulation and then to defraud and plunder all private properties of all European society. In the same way that a fiat system leads to enslavement within a country, the EURO leads to enslavement within Europe.

Fortunately, the EURO, like all attempt of totalitarian domination, must collapse. The collapse is the inevitable fate to this perverse socialist plan. Although men have chronic illness of some facile and petty selfishness, men also manifest prevailing feelings over life, liberty, and property. These sentiments seem to be recorded on the foundations of our biological constitution: the genes. So these sentiments become eventually dominants and its manifestations spawn a great revolution. At this time another great revolution is about to occur: fiat money must expire; The EURO Must Die. Read All... Leer Todo...

Infinita et Infinitesimal -Part I-

From the beginning, about of end of 2005, in all the public posts I have added to this blog I have sustained a so predictable standard of conduct to not contaminate the contents of the notes with my personal feeling. At this point I'll break this rule. I know that my personal feeling are something like a kind of perturbation over a so supposed objectivity linked to all my writings. Nevertheless, I'm a human being. And my actions, like all human actions, depend not only from the designs of strict objective logic of the mind but from both the more subjective and less logic human feeling too.

As examples we have that ethic and moral are feelings, the justice is a feeling, and the love is a feeling. Ethic, moral, justice, and love conform a web of institutions that crossover all mankind life every time. So, sometime, both the strict logic of the mind and the more uncertain feeling of the life work together in an indistinguishable cooperative way. This time I have the pleasure to say that the feeling of love has gotten its tail into my strictly logical mind. Then, this note will be a not so strictly logical one; it is a synthesis of both logical and feeling commands.

Infinita-et-Infinitesimal talk about of size of the universe. The size of the cosmos. What is amazing to me is that this note has been inspired from a lot of interchange, conversations, and dialogs, I have had with an smart young girl. I wanna say that the brilliant mind of she, her elegant colloquial logic, has inspired me to think and to feel all what I'm writing now on this topic. I have never talked about cosmos with she. But her words and her feelings have communicated to me a sort of not said, and not seen, messages about of cosmos, about the size of the universe. I was unable to intercept and to understand all the messages coming from she, my mind is not so sophisticated like yours. However the kind of love that I could feel from she has been as an invigorating and powerful fuel to feed my thinkings and feelings about of cosmos. If I'm, or not, wrong depends on my exclusive capacity to feel and understand all messages coming from she.

Let me now to write what I feel and know about of the universe. Let me start with an ask. What about of cosmos?. What sort of things the cosmos consist of?. To me, the cosmos is a pile of things which are both coming and called to exist. In such conception of the cosmos, the space and the time aren't relevant things. Space-time dimension is only a perceptible manifestation of such existence, but the true qualities of the cosmos, its key character, must be understood and explained not in terms of space-time dimension but in terms of the existence of its members, that is, the properties of the things that are coming and called to exist. The cosmos isn't a sort of entity like a set, because in such situation it would be a paradoxical -undefined- entity. The universe is a well defined entity while it is a collection of situations where reign the cause-effect principle. Nothing violates this principle, nothing escapes to its tyranny, nothing exists without cause.

In this way, nothing prevents to me from thinking that the universe looks like an arbitrary collection of black holes, where all existence occurs and persists around these black holes. If this is true then, and eventually, such arbitrary collection becomes an infinity collection of such weird objects. What is more strange yet is that such weird collection could be so infinitesimal as you want, by a simple logical fact that any arbitrary collection of infinitesimal things could converge to an infinitesimal object. So, a logical result from here is that, all universe could consist of a singular infinitesimal object. Or, in other words, the extreme full infinitude of the cosmos could be pushed to one singular infinitesimal finitude.

Infinitude and finitude are both like two faces of the same object: the universe. In the singularity state -not existence state-, wholes of vast collection of properties from existence has been dissolved because of the simple fact that wholes of existence has vanished. But this singular state contains the germ -the seed- of the existence. Then, from here, from this extreme singularity can explode and evolve all existence. When this occurs -when the singularity explodes- the existence predominates on the universe, that is, the universe becomes populated by an infinitude of objects that come to exist. In this state all properties and laws arise, included the property of existence and not existence of the universe...

This note is not finished yet. I wanna keep writing about of Infinita-et-Infinitesimal. Read All... Leer Todo...

Sound Money and Individual Property Rights

Thorsten Polleit has written a good description about of use of a priori logic on economics theory in a post published at mises.org. He has proved the truth of one implication from unsound money over erosion and destruction of civil liberty and property rights tracing back the link between this proposition and the human action axiom, which is a so illuminating demonstration while it is using the regression theorem of Mises. Nevertheless I have another proof of the truth of such implication, not tracing back the human action axiom link but reducing such proposition to an absurd situation. Here I wanna leave this demonstration.

The implication of Polleit -original proposition- can be stated as follows: if people use unsound money then this money erodes and destroys civil liberty and property rights. But suppose, for a moment, that such proposition is false. So, unsound money preserves civil liberty and property rights. If one individual accepts a not free choice currency -that is unsound money-, such act imply that this individual accepts a coercive and compulsive money imposed for someone which harms his self-interest because harms both his liberty and his rights to choice. This last conclusion contradicts the supposed preservation of liberty and property rights derived from the falsified original proposition. This contradiction come from such supposed truth of the falsified original proposition. Then, the falsified original proposition is false. Then the original proposition is true, what is the same to say that unsound money erodes and destroys civil liberty and property rights. Read All... Leer Todo...

Blogging My Business Cycle in Twitts

Between the last Oct. 24 and Nov. 14, I have written a sequence of twitts in an attempt to enumerate some Hayekian, Rothbardian, and Misesian approach of Austrian Business Cycle Theory -ABCT. This approach is a sound theory of boom and bust economic fluctuations. I know that these fluctuations are always caused and fueled by loose fiat money issued by a central bank and banking system. Men who work in these banks do something like that a fraudulent business issuing loose money. People in a society, which are coercively -by state force an state violence- compelled to use this out of thin air money, must learn to protect their money from these fraudulent state supported bankers men.

All countries around the world have adopted fiat money as both their legal and forced currencies. Each central bank hoards an strict monopoly on money; only central bank can issue legal money. Commercial banks also make their business issuing fiat money through credit expansion. In this way such fiat money issuing system promotes some privileged business protected by state. So, to protect our money from the fraudulent state supported men will be not an easy task. Then we must hope that, while all society around the world stays on violently forced fiat money used to do interchanges and to sign contracts, economic boom and bust will recurrently occur. Today, several economic systems on the planet are going to an economic collapse. Following, I'm blogging all sequence of my twitts about of ABCT and its relation to the ongoing world economic downturn.

A business cycle theory can't be establish for a purely unhampered (free) market. So a business cycle occur in a hampered (not free) market.
24 Oct

The main feature of a cycle is the sudden revelation of business errors... a sudden manifestation of a cluster of errors...
24 Oct

So a sound theory of cycle must explain, in details, such revelation...
24 Oct

We see that such cluster of errors are only revealed after the boom take place, and no businessman really grasps this before the crash...
24 Oct

So, no free market force is the fuel source that is fueling such manifestation...
24 Oct

Thus, this force is not derived from an element of unhampered free market...
24 Oct

We must remember that an unhampered free market is the best economic institution for an spontaneously organized social cooperation...
24 Oct

In a free market -spontaneously organized- society, reigns an steady economic order in price, growth, income, production, demand, employment
24 Oct

If an strange force disturbs an unhampered free market, then such force disturbs that spontaneous order risen from this free market...
24 Oct

Then, the resulting order will be not both so spontaneous and so organized...
24 Oct

It is this deficiency in spontaneity and a persistent disorganization which induces people to commit recurrent and uncontrollable errors...
25 Oct

These error remain growing into society while they are fuelling by such strange force hampering free market...
25 Oct

This force, given it's not a natural force from the free market, eventually succumbs while economics is at the top of the boom...
25 Oct

At this time, errors suddenly arise and free market operations must back on track. From here an economic fix must happen. A crash has begun.
25 Oct

A question I ask is why this violent invader force succumbs?...
26 Oct

My answer is that several but all individuals realize the dangers derived from no free market spontaneity and no free market organization...
26 Oct

From this moment such violent invader force will be no more effective because all individual identify this force as the cause of errors...
26 Oct

My second key ask is, why all individuals realize about such dangers just prior to crash?...
27 Oct

I have only one response to this: only the complacency and ignorance of the public permit the situation continue...
27 Oct

Only the complacency and ignorance of the public makes them slaves of such violent invader force...
27 Oct

Once time such complacency and ignorance have vanished then the violent invader force succumbs, men became free and they can see the dangers
27 Oct

My third question is, why the complacency and ignorance does not last to perpetuate the boom?...
29 Oct

The complacency and ignorance lead to an economic inconsistency between localizations and localisers of goods in an economizing complexity.
31 Oct

In a boom such complacency and ignorance are generalized. So the economic inconsistencies are generalized too...
31 Oct

Trivially, an generalized inconsistent economic system is explosive. Then, it is not perdurable and its close fate is the crash...
31 Oct

An inconsistent economic system looks like an economic system artificially undermined by not profitable investment projects...
6 Nov

My fourth question is, what, in business cycle, this violent invader force consist of?...
6 Nov

This violent invader takes the shape of fiat credit expansion...
6 Nov

Fiat credit expansion feeds the boom -artificial expansion of not profitable investment projects-...
6 Nov

Simultaneously, fiat credit expansion creates destructive inflation in a boom, and its unavoidable solution is a crash...
6 Nov

What the crash consist of?
6 Nov

The crash consists of two unavoidable results: currency collapse or prices collapse...
6 Nov

So, my abstract on business cycle theory looks like following three twitts:
6 Nov

1-A violent force invades the free market using fiat credit expansion and inflation...
6 Nov

2-A boom appears in the way of not profitable investment projects invading all economy...
6 Nov

3-An unavoidable crash emerges, to fix this economic inconsistence, in the form of currency collapse or prices collapse...
6 Nov

What about the relation between the business cycle and the world economic collapse?...
6 Nov

Today, several but all countries around the world are in the final stage of a fiat- credit expansion boom. The next fate is a world crash...
6 Nov

Where do these violent forces that destroy a free market -and a society- come from?
9 Nov

These destructive forces come from the state...
9 Nov

State creates fiat money -inflation- destroys the value of money, expands credit through banking system and promotes artificial investments
9 Nov

In this way the state hampers the free market, causing a boom and its corresponding crash...
9 Nov

The men of the state use theirs coercive and compulsive powers -its violence- to promote and cause this crisis and ruin in a society...
9 Nov

Thus, the statesmen are a privileged class of violent criminals who get rich while the entire society suffers from the crisis...
9 Nov

The societies have an aggressive malignant tumor that invades. This tumor is the state...
9 Nov

Whether societies want to continue prospering they should remove the tumor, they should abolish the state...
9 Nov

Today, the state creates and promotes violence, what is inconsistent with the principle of not violence from which the society depend on...
9 Nov

There are no such things as ends of or actions by groups collectives or States which do not take place as actions by specific individuals...
13 Nov

So, the government doesn't exist. Only exist men that act to, and are controlled by, other men who are recognized as government men...
14 Nov

Of where the credit expansion come from?...
14 Nov

Credit expansion come from two possible sources: a) from government men, and b) from banking system men...
14 Nov

a)The government men expand the credit through fiat money issues...
14 Nov

b)The banking system men expand the credit through fractional lending...
14 Nov

These two sources of expansion provide money created out of thin air...
14 Nov

These two sorts of men provide money created out of thin air...
14 Nov

A consistent economic activity structure can't work so much time with money created out of thin air...
14 Nov

So, a monetary system with money created out of thin air collapses sooner than later...
14 Nov

So, an economics system, under a democratic society, is doomed to collapse because of evil will of men who create money out of thin air...
14 Nov


Of course, you can read the precedent explanation on jcveagle because I'm Blogging My Business Cycle in Twitts. Read All... Leer Todo...

I'm an Anarchist

Mrs. President of Argentina -Cristina Fernandez de K-, along of last G20 meeting held in Cannes -France- about of 3 and 4 November-2011, used the expression “anarcocapitalismo” to address the now observed global financial performance. In truth, such expression used for Mrs. President to characterize a financial market crisis was no so original from she because it is both the same and the recurrent expression used for all Marxian to claim for his loved and totalitarian socialism and to critic the vigorous capitalism. In the pages 155 and 156 -chapter 3- of his book “The Causes of Economic Crisis” written in 1931, Ludwig von Mises said:

“...The Marxian critique censures the capitalistic social order for the anarchy and planlessness of its production methods. Allegedly, every entrepreneur produces blindly, guided only by his desire for profit, without any concern as to whether his action satisfies a need. Thus, for Marxists, it is not surprising if severe disturbances appear again and again in the form of periodical economic crises. They maintain it would be futile to fight against all this with capitalism. It is their contention that only socialism will provide the remedy by replacing the anarchistic profit economy with a planned economic system aimed at the satisfaction of needs.

Strictly speaking, the reproach that the market economy is “anarchistic” says no more than that it is just not socialistic. That is, the actual management of production is not surrendered to a central office which directs the employment of all factors of production, but this is left to entrepreneurs and owners of the means of production. Calling the capitalistic economy “anarchistic,” therefore, means only that capitalistic production is not a function of governmental institutions.

Yet, the expression “anarchy” carries with it other connotations. We usually use the word “anarchy” to refer to social conditions in which, for lack of a governmental apparatus of force to protect peace and respect for the law, the chaos of continual conflict prevails. The word “anarchy,” therefore, is associated with the concept of intolerable conditions. Marxian theorists delight in using such expressions. Marxian theory needs the implications such expressions give to arouse the emotional sympathies and antipathies that are likely to hinder critical analysis. The “anarchy of production” slogan has performed this service to perfection. Whole generations have permitted it to confuse them. It has influenced the economic and political ideas of all currently active political parties and, to a remarkable extent, even those parties which loudly proclaim themselves anti-Marxist...”

It isn't surprising to me that an Sud American politician cultivates in his mind a medieval pre-capitalist idea about of human actions. It isn't surprising to me to see several other politicians of the rest of the world who are clapping while the expressions of Mrs. President Cristina are saying: ohhh!!!, how beasts are all of you, so much that you are not going to eliminate such wild capitalism; what are you waiting from this frenetic capitalism?. But do it is surprising to me is that no Argentinian intellectual, no Argentinian economist, has had the real value to say she: 'how ignorant, how wrong, how arrogant, and how stupid rings a pre-capitalist conception about of now well accepted of all so complex interactions among human beings'.

What Mrs. President don't see, or don't want to accept, is that an economic crisis is always a symptom, a manifestation, of a failure of socialism to contaminate the capitalism. What Mrs. President don't see, or don't want to accept, is that actual crisis is only a symptom, a manifestation, derived from issuing fiat money which is a quasi perfect socialist instrument used to contaminate a sound capitalist economic system. I'm sorry Mrs. President, I see that you mental grasp looks as a so simplistic model for a so complex and sophisticated human action phenomenon. So, given that I'm both one libertarian and anti-totalitarian man, I have to say you that I'm not a socialist. But only given that I believe in a fully free capitalistic society, I have to accept your sentence that: I'm an Anarchist. Read All... Leer Todo...

Cris...? Es para Vos...

Este video está especialmente dedicado para vuestra majestad, la reina, señora presidente... Read All... Leer Todo...

¿Qué Clase de Cosa es El Estado?

"El Estado" es hoy una cosa monstruoasa, tal como se describe en este video. Read All... Leer Todo...

El Objetivo del Comercio es Importar

En una excelente nota compartida entre Don Boudreaux -Professor of Economics at George Mason Universit- y Andy Roth -Vice President of Government Affairs at Club for Growth-, los autores exponen algunos daños que provocarían a la economía Americana aquellas medidas proteccionistas impulsadas por el gobierno de Barack Obama-2011. Es importante leer con cuidado lo que Don [Boudreaux] está señalando. Entre otras cosas, Don expone, en un escueto pero contundente enunciado, una idea que exhibe los verdaderos atributos de la ley del intercambio de bienes económicos: "...Ultimately, the goal of trade is to import goods and services. Exports are a cost; they're the price paid for imports...". Print pdf. Print epub. Read All... Leer Todo...

Economics & Prosperity

In this note I want to share a quotation taken from the introductory remarks of the book Human Action by Ludwig von Mises, Scholar Edition, pages 8 and 9. In this quotation he stresses the importance that economic thought has had as a key determinant of prosperity [technological progress and the resulting increase of wealth and welfare] in our capitalist era. He highlights how libertarian economic ideas has released forces that made possible a sustained period of prosperity, but he also warns of the risk of to halt this progress if pre-capitalistic ideas return as a predominant into the political arena.

"These grumblers do not realize that the tremendous progress of technological methods of production and the resulting increase in wealth and welfare were feasible only through the pursuit of those liberal policies which were the practical application of the teachings of economics. It was the ideas of the classical economists that removed the checks imposed by age-old laws, customs, and prejudices upon technological improvement and freed the genius of reformers and innovators from the straitjackets of the guilds, government tutelage, and social pressure of various kinds. It was they that reduced the prestige of conquerors and expropriators and demonstrated the social benefits derived from business activity. None of the great modern inventions would have been put to use if the mentality of the pre-capitalistic era had not been thoroughly demolished by the economists."

"What is commonly called the "industrial revolution" was an offspring of the ideological revolution brought about by the doctrines of the economists. The economists exploded the old tenets: that it is unfair and unjust to outdo a competitor by producing better and cheaper goods; that it is iniquitous to deviate from the traditional methods of production; that machines are an evil because they bring about unemployment; that it is one of the tasks of civil government to prevent efficient businessmen from getting rich and to protect the less efficient against the competition of the more efficient; that to restrict the freedom of entrepreneurs by government compulsion or by coercion on the part of other social powers is an appropriate means to promote a nation's well-being. British political economy and French Physiocracy were the pacemakers of modern capitalism. It is they that made possible the progress of the natural sciences that has heaped benefits upon the masses." Read All... Leer Todo...

U.S. Government: Downgraded....

On Friday August 5, 2011, S&P just downgraded, for first time in 70 years, the long-term debt of the U.S. Treasury from AAA to AA+, with negative outlook. Here, I leave my comment I have made on a desperate cry made by a commentator at cafehayek blog.

I think it is right to degrade the creditworthiness of a government that has used easy money to rescue bankrupt companies (Bear Stearns, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, General Motors, and others) and create and fund unsustainable interventionist programs (Medicare, Medicaid, permanent wars, trade restrictions, and others). All this puts the U.S. government in a way of bankruptcy. The same thing is happening to European countries with their states' welfare economics. Eventually the general collapse becomes inevitable. Now is the time of such great global Keynesian collapse. The inevitable is about to happen... Read All... Leer Todo...

La Libertad Debe Reinar

Felicitaciones a la dupla

Macri-Vidal

[65% a 35%; Es Paliza]

La libertad es el principal escollo para los tiranos. Por ahora, en esta BENDITA Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires los tiranos han sido derrotados por la voluntad de los ciudadanos. Los ciudadanos hemos optado por la LIBERTAD!!!!!!

Read All... Leer Todo...

Keynesian Theory is Not Economic

Russ Roberts wrote an interesting article [keynes vs reality-2] where he discusses some of the wrong predictions of Samuelson. Samuelson was wrong in his forecast for the economic post-war effects because he tried to predict economic events using a wrong theory: Keynesian theory. I doubt that exist a so absurd theory as Keynesian one. It is a theory full of superficialities, falsehoods, tautologies, and contradictions. But this theory is the mantra that all interventionists use to enforce their social excesses. I leave here the comment I added to this note published by Roberts.

"I have repeated several times, here in Cafe, that the Keynesian problem is not an economic problem. Mankind has trouble to meet their needs for goods, all of which are scarce, forcing its members to maintain a constant battle against a shortage, so that prosperity expresses small advances in that battle. A theory of this problem is an economic theory. But Keynes did not theorizes about this problem. Keynes, and their fanatical followers, says that the obstacle to overcome is not scarcity but 'abundance' because the goods are here but men can not afford them. Then for Keynes the problem is solved if men have the means to acquire these goods. Clearly, Keynes’s theory is 'not' an economic theory. Or, as Roberts says, the Keynesian statement is tautological... This fact should limit the debate between Keynesian and Austrian, because their theories are theories of two different problems and therefore they are not consistently comparable…". Read All... Leer Todo...

El Hombre y sus Derechos

El Gran Bastiat dijo: “...La existencia, la libertad, y la propiedad definen la vida de un ser humano. Eso es precisamente la vida en sí...”. La existencia consiste en el pleno despliegue de su personalidad, la libertad consiste en el pleno ejercicio de sus facultades, y la propiedad consiste en la plena disposición de sus bienes. El hombre viene al mundo con estas tres cosas que conforman sus derechos fundamentales, y que él debe preservar y cultivar. Una sociedad puede prosperar sólo si sus miembros son lo suficientemente inteligentes como para prevenir daños sobre estos derechos. Read All... Leer Todo...

True Liberalism

"...The program of liberalism, therefore, if condensed into a single word, would have to read: property, that is, private ownership of the means of production... All the other demands of liberalism result from this fundamental demand...".

Ludwig von Mises, 1927, Liberalism." Read All... Leer Todo...

Supreme Liberty

Ron Paul has published the book Liberty Defined, where he exposes a clear meaning of liberty. In this book he shows how and why all social individuals have lost their liberties, and he shows how and why all individual rights have been resigned to omnipotent, totalitarian, and criminal monsters: the governments. In this book he redefine the liberty as "...freedom from coercive interference from the state...". In this book he invites us to restore the principle of liberty, he invites us to restore the control of our own life.

Let me say something what I understand about of libertarianism. A true libertarian is someone who grasps the libertarianism as von Mises did do it, and wrote it, in pages 91and 92 of his book Omnipotent Government-The Rise of the Total State and Total War:

"...In order to grasp the meaning of this liberal libertarian program we need to imagine a world order in which liberalism libertarianism is supreme. Either all the states in it are liberal libertarian, or enough are so that when united they are able to repulse an attack of militarist aggressors. In this liberal libertarian world, or liberal libertarian part of the world, there is private property in the means of production. The working of the market is not hampered by government interference. There are no trade barriers; men can live and work where they want. Frontiers are drawn on the maps but they do not hinder the migrations of men and shipping of commodities. Natives do not enjoy rights that are denied to aliens. Governments and their servants restrict their activities to the protection of life, health, and property against fraudulent or violent aggression. They do not discriminate against foreigners. The courts are independent and effectively protect everybody against the encroachments of officialdom. Everyone is permitted to say, to write, and to print what he likes. Education is not subject to government interference. Governments are like night-watchmen whom the citizens have entrusted with the task of handling the police power. The men in office are regarded as mortal men, not as superhuman beings or as paternal authorities who have the right and duty to hold the people in tutelage. Governments do not have the power to dictate to the citizens what language they must use in their daily speech or in what language they must bring up and educate their children. Administrative organs and tribunals are bound to use each man’s language in dealing with him, provided this language is spoken in the district by a reasonable number of residents. In such a world it makes no difference where the frontiers of a country are drawn. Nobody has a special material interest in enlarging the territory of the state in which he lives; nobody suffers loss if a part of this area is separated from the state. It is also immaterial whether all parts of the state’s territory are in direct geographical connection, or whether they are separated by a piece of land belonging to another state. It is of no economic importance whether the country has a frontage on the ocean or not. In such a world the people of every village or district could decide by plebiscite to which state they wanted to belong. There would be no more wars because there would be no incentive for aggression. War would not pay. Armies and navies would be superfluous. Policemen would suffice for the fight against crime. In such a world the state is not a metaphysical entity but simply the producer of security and peace. It is the night-watchman, as Lassalle contemptuously dubbed it. But it fulfils this task in a satisfactory way. The citizen's sleep is not disturbed, bombs do not destroy his home, and if somebody knocks at his door late at night it is certainly neither the Gestapo nor the O.G.P.U...".

Unfortunately, the men live today in a totalitarian world. The men have given their lives to the totalitarians. The men seem to have chosen the designs of slavery to enjoy the benefits of their own freedoms. von Mises, follows about the causes of such reality: "...The reality in which we have to live differs very much from this perfect world of ideal liberalism libertarianism. But this is due only to the fact that men have rejected liberalism libertarianism for etatism slaverism. They have burdened the state, which could be a more or less efficient night-watchman, with a multitude of other duties. Neither nature, nor the working of forces beyond human control, nor inevitable necessity has led to etatism slaverism, but the acts of men. Entangled by dialectic fallacies and fantastic illusions, blindly believing in erroneous doctrines, biased by envy and insatiable greed, men have derided capitalism and have substituted for it an order engendering conflicts for which no peaceful solution can be found...".

What von Mises have stated in this pages of his brilliant work is an special dream. A dream that can come true if each supreme individual can realize of he has all rights of it supreme liberty. Read All... Leer Todo...

Para Recomendar (I)

http://mises.org/daily/5303/What-Drives-Higher-Unemployment contiene una adecuada explicación y aplicación del Efecto Ricardiano. El autor destaca las componentes benignas y malignas de este efecto. La componente benigna, inducida por las fuerzas del mercado, permite enderezar las acciones humanas en dirección a la prosperidad. Mientras que la componente maligna, inducida por los gobiernos y los sindicatos, colocan a la sociedad en dirección a la esclavitud y a la pobreza.

http://mises.org/daily/5302/The-World-According-To-de-Jasay es una presentación del libro [Justice and Its Surroundings-By Anthony de Jasay-2003]. En este libro se exponen los argumentos suficientes que una sociedad dispone a la hora de rechazar la presencia de los gobiernos: los objetivos más anhelados por los individuos en una sociedad sólo pueden alcanzarse en ausencia de los gobiernos. Los gobernantes siempre actúan ocasionando perjuicios sociales, y su presencia significa uno de los mayores impedimentos para la prosperidad humana.

http://mises.org/journals/qjae/pdf/qjae14_1_5.pdf es un paper en el cual Thomas J. DiLorenzo expone una extraordinaria explicación de los ideales depredatorios y totalitarios que dieron origen a los Bancos Centrales. El Banco Central constituye una pieza fundamental de la estructura de poder mundial -que surgió en el siglo XVII y aún persiste en nuestros días- pensada y diseñada para estafar, saquear, y esclavizar a los individuos que integran cualquier sociedad que se establece sobre la tierra. El Banco Central es, ni más ni menos, el instrumento perfecto para proveer financiamiento a ese monstruoso esquema ideado para la explotación y el sometimiento de los hombres. Read All... Leer Todo...

Una Sociedad Saqueada

El hombre puede vivir y desarrollar su vida por medio de la asimilación y apropiación al aplicar plenamente sus facultades sobre los recursos que dispone y utilizar libremente los frutos que se obtienen de ello. O sea el hombre puede vivir dignamente y prosperar del fruto de su trabajo, mediante la producción. Pero esta no es la única manera de hacerlo. El hombre también puede vivir y prosperar a expensas de otros hombres. Es decir puede asimilar y apropiarse del fruto del trabajo de otras personas, mediante el saqueo. Ambas predisposiciones, para producir y saquear, provienen de la misma naturaleza del hombre, del más primitivo sentimiento que todos los humanos tenemos para obtener el mejor bienestar con el menor dolor posible. Aunque ambas predisposiciones son fuente de bienestar en el hombre, una de ellas no contribuye a la prosperidad de una sociedad.

En la naturaleza, la predisposición del hombre a saquear es dominante. Es decir los hombres prefieren no trabajar y saquear la propiedad de otros hombres en lugar de realizar esfuerzo trabajando y así obtener los bienes para cubrir los requerimientos y satisfacer sus necesidades. Este resultado se deriva del sentimiento predominante de menor dolor. El hombre tiende a hacer lo que le provoca menor dolor. La prevalencia de este impulso es inevitable.

Sin dar ni una explicación adicional, uno no requiere ser tan inteligente para darse cuenta que si bien el sentimiento del menor dolor es dominante, el predominio del saqueo en la vida del hombre es socialmente inconsistente. Es decir una sociedad no puede constituirse y prosperar sobre el estándar de los saqueos, pues si bien los saqueos proporcionan beneficios a los saqueadores igualmente provocan daños a las víctimas del saqueo, lo cual es equivalente a decir que los saqueos no generan prosperidad social. Y si una sociedad no prospera, no tiene razón de ser con lo cual tarde o temprano se diluye.

De alguna manera, del hombre viviendo en sociedad, ha surgido una institución para lidiar con los saqueos. Dado que el hombre le huye al dolor y como el trabajo genera dolor, entonces en la medida en que el dolor que le provoque saquear sea inferior al dolor que le provoque trabajar el hombre opta por saquear. Dado que los saqueos son un obstáculo para la prosperidad de una sociedad -una reunión de hombres- luego la anterior observación contiene una solución para este problema de los saqueos. Alcanza colocar un obstáculo más peligroso y más doloroso que el trabajo. Osea, colocar un obstáculo inevitable de tal manera que si un hombre intentara sortearlo para saquear perciba ciertos peligros y un dolor superior al del trabajo. Así, las indeseables conductas derivadas del mínimo dolor se combaten con peligro y dolor.

Ese obstáculo que se opone a los saqueos y que los hombres viviendo en sociedad construyen para evitar los daños derivados de la conducta del mínimo dolor, es una institución que se conoce con el nombre de la ley – la verdadera ley o la regla de la ley-. Mi propia interpretación del significado de la ley dado por Bastiat es como sigue: "...la ley es la organización del derecho natural a la legítima auto-defensa. Es la utilización de una fuerza colectiva, en lugar de una fuerza individual, para defender la vida de los hombre que viven en sociedad...". La ley, dice Bastiat, "...actúa en una esfera en la cual ella tiene derecho para actuar, hace lo que ella tiene derecho a hacer: garantizar la seguridad de las personas, la libertad, y los derechos de propiedad, causar el reinado de la justicia sobre todo...".

Para que esa barrera formidable, la ley, sea efectiva ella debe garantizar el sentido de justicia. Es decir los hombres deben percibir sin ambigüedad que si violan la ley, cometiendo saqueos, ellos recibirán efectivamente un castigo mucho más doloroso que el dolor causado por el esfuerzo de su trabajo, y además cada hombre debe percibir que si resulta víctima de un saqueo entonces el daño que ello provocare le será recompensado. Cuando una sociedad pierde el sentido de justicia, entonces la ley deja de ser ley y los saqueos se generalizan.

Que los saqueos sean socialmente inconsistentes no significa que no persistan. Por ejemplo hoy en día ocurre todo lo contrario, pues los saqueadores abundan y los saqueos masivos se observan con mayor frecuencia en las sociedades. ¿por qué pasa esto?. ¿ no es que la institución de la ley lo impide?. Lo que ocurre es que en algunos momentos de la historia de la humanidad, viviendo en sociedad, la justicia deja de ser justicia y la ley deja de ser ley. ¿Qué clase de mal invade toda una sociedad como para que los más perversos individuos ejecuten con éxito sus violaciones?. Resulta doloroso decirlo pero creo correcto hacerlo: ese mal se llama gobierno. Son los gobiernos albergando gobernantes dañinos quienes constituyen una sofisticada red organizada de saqueadores.

Lo paradójico de esta tragedia es que es la misma dinámica social quien habilita, quien otorga el poder, para que ciertos señores saqueadores violen toda clase de derechos. Resulta paradójico que los gobiernos, una organización pensada para proteger la vida de los hombres, se vuelva el instrumento más eficaz, y más mortífero, que destruye la vida de ellos. Es como una clase de estupidez que no logro entender. Pero es lo que pasa, es lo que abrumadoramente se observa a diario. ¿Cómo es que estas criaturas perversas ejecutan su maldad desde el gobierno?.

Este hecho ocurre, también, por el predominio del sentimiento de menor dolor. Como los hombres saben que la ley es una formidable barrera opuesta al sentimiento de menor dolor, y como ellos se encuentran invadidos por ese sentimiento, entonces hacen lo que esté a su alcance para controlar esa barrera. Osea hacen lo posible para tomar el control de la ley. La manera de tomar ese control es llegando al gobierno. Una vez ahí escriben las normas y forjan una clase de ley que les permite saquear y vivir a expensas de otros hombres de la sociedad. Estos señores tienen un comportamiento en la sociedad algo similar al del virus del SIDA en el cuerpo humano. Este virus toma el control de las barreras inmunológicas para llevar adelante su infección y contaminar el cuerpo de una persona. Las barreras inmunológicas del humano manipuladas por el virus se comportan de un modo tal que este patógeno logra cumplir su cometido: vivir y prosperar a expensas del humano.

La sociedad no ha encontrado aún una cura para contrarrestar el poder nocivo de los gobernantes. Cualquiera sea el gobierno de turno, cualquiera sea la ideología, cualquiera sea el nivel de formación educativa, el estatus social, la raza, o las creencias religiosas, los gobernantes siempre tienen el control de la ley. Si un pequeño grupo de personas puede controlar la ley, entonces ellos pueden adaptarla para concretar actos que violan derechos del resto de las personas quienes no tienen ese poder por no formar parte del gobierno. Con lo cual este SIDA social está siempre latente, sino activo, en la sociedad. La sociedad, al igual que el humano contra el SIDA, no tiene inmunidad contra este patógeno. Ni siquiera una buena constitución -ley para limitar los poderes de los gobernantes- la vuelve inmune. Mientras la ley sea la única barrera para oponerse al saqueo, y mientras los gobernantes tengan el monopolio de la ley, esta enfermedad -grupo de personas capturando la ley para dañar a la sociedad- parece algo contra lo cual la humanidad tendrá que batallar siempre.

La captura de la ley es hoy un problema crónico. Últimamente ha invadido a casi todas las democracias del mundo. Cada grupo de gobernantes que llega al poder aprovecha la oportunidad para adaptar la norma a su medida y luego perpetrar el saqueo a la sociedad, siendo este uno de los peores males que hoy azota a toda la humanidad. Los ejemplos abundan. Así en los países más avanzados basta tomar cualquier democracia y observar con cuidado las leyes que se impulsan y aprueban, a quienes terminan beneficiando esas leyes, y además chequear el modo en que las leyes cambian con el arribo de nuevos gobiernos.

En los países menos avanzados como los latinoamericanos, en especial Argentina, además de mirar la secuencia de leyes, uno encuentra que la riqueza y el ingreso por habitante hace más de 80 años que no cambia, con lo cual la sociedad no ha prosperado. En Argentina por ejemplo, si el ingreso hubiera crecido 3% por año, en ese periodo se habría generado un excedente de ingresos de unas 20 veces 300 billones de dólares. Esas 20 veces 300 billones de dólares -unos 6 trillones de dólares- es una medida de la pérdida en prosperidad de la sociedad Argentina por no dejar crecer su ingreso mientras los sucesivos gobernantes llegaban al poder no para velar por la prosperidad de la sociedad sino para cambiar las leyes y perpetrar los saqueos. No me quedan dudas de que esta falla en la prosperidad se debe casi exclusivamente a la universalización de los saqueos impulsados o habilitados desde los gobiernos. Una trágica historia de Una Sociedad Saqueada.


Atte.
Juan Carlos Vera. Buenos Aires, Argentina. Read All... Leer Todo...

Me Voy de Blogger

Quiero invitar a quienes leen mis notas a seguirlas en mi blog que migraré a la plataforma de WordPress. Por ahora estoy abandonando la plataforma Blogger debido a los trastornos que me ha generado las permanentes interrupciones abruptas de su servicio. Blogger nunca comunica adecuadamente sobre estos problemas y tengo la sensación que un buen día al levantarme descubriré que blogger ha dejado de funcionar definitivamente...

Mi nuevo blog es http://jcveagle.wordpress.com


Un abrazo para todos...
Read All... Leer Todo...