, 10 tweets, 3 min read
My Authors
Read all threads
The realm of #politics is to coordinate solutions beyond what decentralized actors and organizations can themselves achieve. This is done through the power of #thestate (coercion). Thus, the scope and use for politics as a means is strictly limited to where it is the better
solution for society and its constituents. This means the boundary of the proper use of politics and the state is identified by what can (and will) be coordinated through decentralized means. In other words, the boundary of politics is composed by our understanding for the
mechanisms behind spontaneous orders and their emergence. Chief among them is the price mechanism and economic calculation. In other words, the 'other side' of politics, which suggests where and to what extent the powers of the state should and can be used, is #economics and,
more broadly, economic literacy. Economic theory explains how markets, the non-directed and unplanned coordination of decentralized efforts, work. Where markets work, and where the market order does not pose a problem that is unsolvable by market actors themselves, there is no
reason for politics--other than as prescribed by the minority normative position that coercion is somehow preferred over voluntarism. There are of course issues involved with defining the exact boundary of the proper realm of politics, and which issues are actual problems. There
is also a problem with 'insiders' in the political system having more or less unlimited interest in expanding their sphere of influence (if not power). But the underlying problem, especially in democracies, is widespread economic illiteracy: if we do not (or will not) understand
how markets work and how beneficial orders can arise spontaneously out of the actions of self-interested actors, whether individuals or families or businesses, then we undermine, move out, and will even dissolve the boundary of the proper realm for politics. In other words, to
use Franz Oppenheimer's old but insightful dichotomy, we invite the political means (coercion), along with the inefficiency and unproductive (if not destructive) incentive structures, to take over the proper space of the economic means (voluntarism). That's problematic for all of
us, if not for society overall, and poses an ethical problem since the vast majority does *not* hold the position that 'coercion is preferable to voluntarism'. A problem that can only be solved by learning how markets work, to study sound economics, and to gain economic literacy.
As Mises put it:
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh.

Enjoying this thread?

Keep Current with Per Bylund

Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

Twitter may remove this content at anytime, convert it as a PDF, save and print for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video

1) Follow Thread Reader App on Twitter so you can easily mention us!

2) Go to a Twitter thread (series of Tweets by the same owner) and mention us with a keyword "unroll" @threadreaderapp unroll

You can practice here first or read more on our help page!

Follow Us on Twitter!

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just three indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3.00/month or $30.00/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!