Caretaker

Hitler never read John Maynard Keynes. But the terrible Nazi leader saved Germany from world economic depression in the 1930's. His steps were similar to the steps offered by British economists to address the state of paralysis. And Germany, it turned out, was not affected by paralysis. Since 1933, after he came to power, Hitler borrowed money, and spent it. The amount was unsparing. He built railroads, canals, public buildings, Autobahnen. He thus creating the jobs. Towards 1935, the unemployment practically ended in Germany.

Hitler, a man who believed that he -- and "he" here could mean the state -- should lead, appeared to the stage and created a government that actively regulated the economy. Towards 1936, when the incomes rose and the prices tended to rise and the wages began to rise, he said, "Stop it". The sale and purchase of foreign currency was controlled. Use of imported goods sought was limited. Germany, with it all, emerged as a unique achievement for the malaise era in 30's: no one was unemployed, and prices were stable.

Indeed, Hitler never read John Maynard Keynes. But the result was more or less the same as what would be favored by a follower of Keyn.: John Kenneth Galbraith (he himself, at that time was a new Keynesian) wrote in The Age of Uncertainty about Hitler's achievement, "The results were all a Keynesian could have wished."















But Hitler has made many people feel daunted. His reign, with the same spirit as when he set up the economy, also set the life of each person. In the 1930's, the living was so desperate and the atmosphere was so gloomy. Hope was replaced by anger.

The period is the time of disappointment to democracy. In Italy, a social scientist, Mario Palmieri writing aloud, "Democracy is a form of bitch socio-political organization. The crowd created to be led, and not to lead, and ultimately created to be slaves, and not to become the master."

Fascism was born of such a view. For Mussolini, his Fascism is an affirmation that human beings are not created equal, and equal suffrage will not change reality. Inequality is actually good. There is a leader (in this case is the state) and those who are led, and they are the people.

From the top of his balcony in Rome, with a black dress and sound fanatical, Mussolini shouted, "The state is not only the present, but also the past and, above all, it is the future". Beyond the short track the lives of individuals, the state stands as the deepest inner voice of a nation.

Unfortunately -- if that word may be used here -- Mussolini, and Hitler, did not last long. They had fallen before we all witnessed how a society could constantly occupied with such a concept. It would be interesting to know, how people of Italy or Germany could survive with the idea that the state was "the deepest inner voice of the nation".

For those who live after Hitler, Mussolini, and Stalin fell, such a state is a myth. In the end, the state is also people with their short lives. In the end, the state -- as the arrangement of the apparatus that takes care of common life -- has its limits as well. It will not be able to absolutely dominate human to get inti  their inner voice. It even sometimes incompetent to take care of the "little things", such as health, trade and traffic.

Fortunately, I have a sweet partner. He -- though not with a very firm voice -- can look and say, "Do not give unlimited power to the state."

Indeed, my partner is not the one who comes up with the independence idea a la Milton Friedman. I'm also guessing whether he is -- in a certain sense -- also a "Keynesian". But it was interesting that he -- in our casual chat yesterday -- used the term "Caretaker State". The term "Caretaker" is more comfortable for me than the term "Government". Especially if I recall the roots of his words, and especially for a period that has witnessed many bitter experiences in terms of power, at the end of the 20th century. Because it means we are "taken care of", and not "being governed".
***


[CZ-lacalifusa030114]