[Onebornfree/Freedom Network commentary: Bill Bonner is one of the few financial writers that I bother to keep up with these days, not because I always agree with his opinion on the economy etc., although I fairly often do, but because he is a very good and thoughtful writer who makes me think; he does not pull any punches, and he is also often very funny, so he makes me laugh as well as think. However, this particular piece by him, although originally directed at his usual audience, and therefor superficially concerned with business/finance/investment, and related economic issues, has far broader implications, and the "big picture" message - the futility of central planning - has, in my opinion, very important implications and broad principles that can be applied to all facets of an individuals life. My only "quibble" with this article is his use of the economist F.A, Hayek's "Fatal Conceit" quote and related as a supposed illustration of Bonner's ideal, when in fact, if you dig below the surface, you will discover that Hayek, although he superficially talked "a good game", was, ultimately, very much a statist/central planner himself :-) . Regards, onebornfree.]
"There are those who believe they can make the right decision more
right… or the poet more poetic. And although many of these snake-oil
salesmen content themselves with a quick buck and the next train out of
town, some of them go for the long con. These are the central planners.
The illusions, mistakes and misconceptions of central planners take
their toll in a great variety of ways – mostly as costly nuisances.
Occasionally, when they are particularly ambitious, they make the
Napoleon’s march on Moscow. Mao’s great famine. The Soviet Union’s
70-year economic experiment. These fiascos are caused by well-meaning,
smart public officials. They are the Hell to which the road paved with
good intentions leads.
The Fatal Conceit
Sometimes, a mistaken public policy can be reversed or abandoned
before it has done serious harm. Mostly, however, a combination of
special circumstances makes correction impossible. The disastrous
policies are reinforced until they finally reckon themselves out in a
Large-scale planners fail because they believe three things that aren’t true.
First, that they know the exact and entire present state of the
community they are planning for (wants, desires, hopes, capabilities,
resources); second, that they know where the community ought to go (what
future would be best); third, that they are capable of creating the
future they want.
None of those things is more than an illusion. Together, they
constitute what F.A. Hayek called “the fatal conceit… that man is able
to shape the world around him according to his wishes.”
Each man always does his level best to shape his world in a way that
pleases him. One wants a fat wife. One wants a fortune. One wants to
spend his time playing golf. Each will try to get what he wants
depending upon the circumstances. And the future will happen.
The pretension of the central planner is he knows a better future – one that he can design and bring about.
The god-like vanity of this assertion is staggering. No one knows
what future is best for humankind. People only know what they want.
The Future Has to Wait
We presume the best future is the one in which people get what they want… or at the very least what they deserve.
A man burning in Hell may want ice cream; it doesn’t mean he will get
it. But the central planner presumes to know not only what he wants,
but also what he should have. (It is scarcely worth mentioning that the
central planner’s hands are as empty as his head. He has no ice cream to
Where individual plans and evolution will take us collectively no one
knows. Fate will have the final say. But the central planner will have
his say first, disrupting the plans of millions of people in the
process. He certainly has no amor fati. It would put him out of business.
Instead, he steps in to impose his version of the future. And as soon
as the smallest bit of time and resources are shanghaied for his ends
rather than those of individual planners, the rate of natural,
evolutionary progress slows.
The millions of private trials that would have otherwise taken place
are postponed or canceled. The errors that might have been revealed and
corrected are not discovered. The future has to wait.
Even when they are applied with ruthless thoroughness, central plans
inevitably and eventually go FUBAR. No “workers’ paradise” ever happens.
The War on Drugs (or Poverty… or Crime… or Terror… or Cancer) ends in a
defeat, not a victory. Unemployment does not go down. The “war to end
war” doesn’t end war. The Domino Theory falls; the dominoes don’t.
And if any of these grand programs “succeeds,” it does so by undoing
previous plans often at a cost that is far out of balance with the
reward. World War II is an example of central planning that seemed to
work. But the Allies were merely nullifying the efforts of more
ambitious central planners in Germany and Japan.
A Not So Rational Life
Generally, life on Earth is not so “rational” that it lends itself to
simple-minded, heavy-handed intervention by the naïve social engineer.
Sure, we can design bridges. Houses too. And particle accelerators.
But we cannot design economies. No more than we can invent real
languages. Societies. Customs. Markets. Love. Marriages. Children. Or
any of the other important things in life.
Not to overstate the case, however, it is also true that humans can
design and achieve a certain kind of future. If the planners at the
Pentagon, for example, decided that a nuclear war would be a good thing,
they could bring it about. The effects would be huge. And hugely
This extreme example reveals the only kind of alternative future that
the planners are capable of delivering. Large-scale central planning
can be effective, but only by pulverizing the delicate fabric of evolved
It is a future that practically no one wants, because it means
destroying the many different futures already in the works – marriages,
businesses, babies, baptisms, hunting trips, shopping, investments and
all the other activities of normal life.
Not all central planning produces calamities on that scale, of
course. But all, to the extent they are effective, are repulsive. The
more they achieve the planners’ goals, the more they interfere with
private goals, and the more they retard or destroy the progress of the