Classical liberalism was, at its core, a transitional philosophy: a necessary step in the historical evolution away from the absolutism of monarchy and toward the only consistent vision of liberty — anarchy.
One of the deepest errors in modern economic thinking is the false belief that demand, by itself, creates wealth. This is the core illusion behind Keynesianism, monetarism, and every other form of violent intervention in money and credit.
The rise of state pensions inevitably coincides with the destruction of peaceful, voluntary, and responsible institutions of civil society. This is no accident. Long before such schemes appear, violence steadily erodes capital through taxation, inflation, and regulation.
One of the great ironies of anti-capitalist resentment is that the envy and contempt fueling opposition to the market does not arise from rigid hierarchies produced by liberty and voluntary exchange, but from a fundamental misunderstanding of the difference between liberty and statism.
The belief that tourism “brings money into the country” and is therefore good for “the nation” is rooted in a persistent fallacy: mercantilism—the mistaken idea that money is wealth. From this confusion springs a host of destructive ideologies.
The Scandinavian model is often misrepresented as a humane and efficient form of socialism. In reality, it is a distinctly coercive and oligarchic form of statism.
The regression theorem demonstrates, as a praxeological law, that money must originate as a marketable commodity before it can evolve into a widely-accepted medium of exchange. Yet what is often missed is that this theorem—logically derived from the axiom of action—has broader implications for the genesis of all social institutions.
Human beings act. That is: they engage in purposeful behavior aimed at transforming their conditions into a state they prefer more. This fundamental axiom is apodictically certain. To deny it is to affirm it—for even the act of denial is itself an action: a purposeful attempt to assert a position.
The entire narrative of “de-dollarization” is not merely economically flawed—it is, at its core, a collectivist delusion.
