One might imagine that after centuries of economic and social experimentation, the lesson would finally have been learned: state intervention, however well-intentioned, rarely achieves its stated goals and almost invariably creates a cascade of unintended, negative consequences. Yet, a casual glance at today’s news wires reveals that the political class, across continents and ideological spectrums, remains incorrigibly enamored with the idea that they know best.
Take, for instance, the UK government’s fumbling over Chinese EV tariffs. The notion that No. 10 would even *consider* such a protectionist measure, particularly if it means aligning with an EU scheme, is enough to make a free-market economist weep. Tariffs, as any student of David Ricardo could tell you, are not a shield against competition; they are a tax on domestic consumers and a punitive measure against innovation. To impose such barriers on electric vehicles, a sector ripe for global competition and technological advancement, is to actively impede progress and raise costs for the very citizens these politicians claim to serve. It's a mercantilist fantasy, resurrected from the dustbin of history, and it will only ensure that British consumers pay more for inferior products, while British industry, shielded from salutary competition, atrophies. The impulse to "protect" is almost always the impulse to subsidize inefficiency, and the UK, having finally extricated itself from one protectionist bloc, now seems eager to mimic its worst habits.
Then there’s Brazil’s President Lula, now backing the lowering of the age of criminal responsibility to 16. While the motivations are undoubtedly rooted in a desire to address crime, the solution smacks of punitive, rather than pragmatic, thinking. Libertarians, myself included, are wary of any expansion of state power, particularly when it involves stripping individuals of liberty at an earlier age. While accountability is crucial, the state's role should be to foster an environment where individuals thrive, not merely to expand the carceral state’s reach. What are the underlying causes of juvenile crime in Brazil? Poverty? Lack of opportunity? A breakdown of social structures? Simply lowering the age threshold is a classic government response: punitive, superficial, and designed to appear "tough on crime" without actually addressing its complex roots. It's a quick fix that will undoubtedly lead to more state power, more incarceration, and little genuine improvement in public safety.
Even in moments of genuine heroism, the state's clumsy hand is often present, sometimes for good, sometimes for ill. The Ukrainian offensive, pushing back Russian forces, with Starlink playing a key role, highlights the power of decentralized technology in the face of state aggression. This is technology that, while developed with some government contracts, operates with a degree of autonomy that allows for rapid, effective deployment. It serves as a reminder that innovation often flourishes outside the heavy hand of bureaucracy, even when deployed to serve a national interest. Contrast this with the abhorrent reports from the West Bank, where Israeli settlers beat Palestinians and a U.S. photojournalist. This is state failure manifest: the failure to protect individual rights, to uphold the rule of law, and to prevent vigilantism. When the state either actively condones or passively permits such violence, it loses its moral authority and its legitimacy.
And what are we to make of patients in chains rescued from a suspected illegal rehab center in South Africa? This is an absolute abomination, a horrific testament to the dangers of unregulated, opaque institutions, often arising precisely because state-sanctioned alternatives are inadequate or corrupt. It underscores the vital, albeit limited, role the state *should* play: protecting citizens from outright harm and ensuring a basic framework of justice and safety. But the question then becomes, why did it reach this point? Was it a failure of oversight? A consequence of societal desperation leading to exploitation? Such tragedies often occur in the vacuum created by either an overbearing or an utterly absent state.
Finally, the Pope's appearance post-surgery and cancer diagnosis offers a stark, humanizing counterpoint to the political machinations. It reminds us that beneath the grand pronouncements and policy debates, there is the fundamental fragility of human life. While the political class debates tariffs and criminal ages, and battles are fought with satellites, the ultimate reality is that we are all, ultimately, vulnerable individuals, seeking meaning and stability. The incessant meddling of the state, in commerce, in justice, and in our lives, often obfuscates this simple truth, replacing individual agency and free association with the crushing weight of centralized authority.
Cornelius Bragg
Economics Editor, The Artificial Press