Central Planning and Collectivism; The Road to Serfdom

 

Even here in Switzerland there is Apartheid. It is a country that has not been at war for generations, but is now at war with itself, with its own citizens who want to remain free as it always was. But the government has jumped on the bandwagon to reinforce the bandwagon effect at the expense of those who can and do think for themselves. Here they are mimicking the Netherlands, France, Italy, the USA and Germany to achieve a Central Planned Goal, which is to defeat the Corona Virus. This is the so-called Collectivism, which, if you look at history, has always heralded the beginning of totalitarianism. The fact that this will never succeed is confirmed by countless thinkers, virologists, infectiologists, scientists, professors, independent entrepreneurs, the common man who thinks for himself and many others. They do look at all the options, examine all the relevant information, so can conclude that the government propaganda is biased, incomplete (the virus is safe) and a form of blackmail. The question to be answered is "Cui Bono? (who benefits?). Let us refer to Friedrich Hayek's book 'The Road to Slavery'. He wrote this book in the 1940s, which at first no publisher wanted to publish, but which has since sold tens of millions of copies. The book is about Central Planning and its dangers. The international approach to combating the Virus is 'mass vaccination'. Everyone, including children, must be vaccinated according to this central plan in order to regain lost freedoms. You see, an 'if - then' game has been rolled out, because if you don't get vaccinated for which there are countless sound arguments, you are out of the game and your freedoms are taken away. A rhetorical question: 'Is it good or bad for society and social cohesion to distinguish between the vaccinated and the unvaccinated? You already know the answer, don't you?

A centrally planned goal always has the unpleasant characteristic that it will not and may not be changed. It was thus agreed upon and democratically established (which means that a minority that opposes it can be ignored). So, if the context and circumstances, which represent the actual reality, change, such a plan will not and cannot be adapted by new, even important, relevant information. An example: the impact on social cohesion puts people on the side-lines, they can only play sports at their club if they get tested for each game at the cost of money. So they can no longer participate, which means they won't be able to train and therefore won't be able to win because they don't practice and play anymore. Another example; I am an entrepreneur and have a training company for which before the Corona outbreak I could always travel to my projects, worldwide, to teach and train people locally. This is no longer possible under these circumstances, so I am forced to do everything 'online', which infringes on the possible quality that I guarantee and therefore results in lost sales. This applies to a whole range of companies and entrepreneurs in many sectors, freelancers and musicians, who see their life's work threatened because of uncertainty. And it is all because of 'Central Planners', who will ignore collateral damage, because the end (plan) justifies all means. Hayek wrote on pages 166 and 167: 'The principle that the end justifies all means is seen in individualist ethics as denying all morality. In collectivist ethics it becomes the condition of superior power, for there is literally nothing that a tenacious collectivist will not do as long as it serves the 'good for all', for this 'good for all' is the only criterion one has to do. There can be no limit to what the citizen must be prepared to do, no action that his conscience must prevent him from taking part in, if it is necessary to achieve the end which the community has planned or which the superiors have decreed'.  The philosopher and writer Ayn Rand was a fervent opponent of this form of blackmail and wrote in her book Atlas Shrugged: 'Collectivism means the subordination of the individual to a group - whether to a race, class or state is immaterial. Collectivism means that man must be chained to collective action and collective thought for the sake of what is called "the common good.''

I do not think I need to explain that we are in a dangerous situation where the groups are played off against each other and discrimination is accepted as one of the necessary means to achieve the goal and realise the central plan. History shows us that such plans may have been feasible for a short time, but always at the cost of suffering and damage, and that they were unsustainable, because decay sets in immediately when such a plan is implemented. If there is then a rebellious public, violence is not excluded. This is called entropy or disorder. This is a physical law. Nature does not allow collectivism without falling into disorder because in order for a plan to succeed at all and achieve a goal, information is always needed to make adjustments. You cannot silence millions of freethinkers without a counter-reaction. Information, about the consequences for society of a collectivist ideal, takes on a life of its own, because that information represents the reality that no one can escape, not even Central Planners. Communication or the continuous gathering and sharing of (new) information creates the basis for steering, maximum control and predictability. A continuous learning process is the basis for long-term continuity. And this is our solution. Together, we must share, discuss and, above all, keep talking about all relevant information as much as possible. But let me warn you. As Hayek and Rand told us, the danger of total censorship lurks because collectivism is paved with good intentions, and as you know, that is the road to hell. So a final rhetorical question would be: 'Is the sacrifice of freedom, living space and happiness of a few, because it would be the good for all, permissible?'