Full transcript
0:00Let's see, good morning.
0:02The Eprime (President of the Spanish Parliament ) very kindly
0:04invited me to talk to you
0:07a little about problems and...
0:11problems and dysfunctions
0:13of public administration or something like that.
0:15They told me to touch on that subject
0:17. It's a subject that I like to touch on. I
0:19like to touch on the subject of the failure of the State,
0:22the failure of the public sector
0:24and why
0:25it's difficult for public administrations to function well.
0:28So, basically,
0:31we can
0:33begin to analyze
0:35what those failures are
0:36, what are the problems at the root
0:38of public administration
0:39and then look at some of its failures.
0:40Public administration, what does it do?
0:43What is the function of public administration?
0:45the function of public administration
0:46is the management
0:48of those socialist
0:50areas
0:51of social life
0:52I mean, public administration
0:55appropriates or the State
0:56the State for me is an imaginary entity, it doesn't exist...
0:59but the administration, but...
1:01it's an imaginary entity if there
1:03aren't... concrete organized people
1:04there's nothing called the State
1:06in your head
1:07it can exist through a map
1:08through a series of things
1:10the idea of Guatemala, of Spain
1:11or of Galicia or of the United States
1:13but it doesn't have real existence, it's a myth
1:16that you have in your brains
1:19but well, that group of organized people
1:22who monopolize power
1:24decided that certain
1:26areas of social life
1:28are managed by those people
1:31there are areas that are ceded to the market
1:33and other areas that they decide
1:34to administer or manage
1:37directly, so
1:39public administration
1:41is the management or the administration of those
1:44parts of the economy that are socialist
1:45of those parts of the economy
1:46that are socialized, for example
1:48the State decides that it is going to provide education
1:51or so
1:52then, there is an educational administration
1:54the State decides that it is going to manage, for example
1:57the creation or the monopoly of money
1:59Therefore, there is a central bank
2:01and there is management of money.
2:03The State decides that it will administer
2:05and apply justice.
2:06Well, there is a public management
2:07or administration of justice.
2:11So, those...
2:13those areas of social life
2:15that the State totally
2:16or partially
2:17administers
2:18are what we call
2:19public administration.
2:21A very nice name
2:23, but basically, it is
2:24the management of those areas by that group of people
2:27who dominate the rest of society
2:29through weapons
2:30. And...
2:32what is the problem...
2:33or the problems...
2:36that such management poses for us?
2:43Well, two...
2:45at first glance
2:48, two,
2:53one,
2:56lack of economic calculation.
2:59Two ,
3:02lack of cost and benefit.
3:06When we talk about lack of cost and benefit
3:08, I will go into the subject of economic calculation later.
3:12Have any of you played poker?
3:16Has no one here
3:17played a game of poker?
3:20No one?
3:20He, she
3:22. Have you played poker?
3:23Have you ever played with money?
3:26And have you ever played without money?
3:28That is, with buttons,
3:29with matches or something like that
3:32. Is the game the same?
3:34Why?
3:44Yes...
3:49very good definition,
3:51young lady,
3:53young lady, when she plays poker
3:55with money
3:56she assumes the benefits
3:57and assumes the losses directly, yes or no?
4:01When I play with buttons,
4:02she assumes neither benefits nor losses,
4:04right?
4:05Well, there you have the difference
4:06between public and private management,
4:09you play cards differently
4:13with different prudence...
4:14When...
4:16there is a benefit and a loss
4:17, when there is not,
4:18then, that is the difference between public administration
4:21and a totally private
4:23company
4:25is that in one
4:26you assume the profits and losses
4:27and you play in one way,
4:29you play prudently,
4:30you don't risk too much
4:31or you risk if you think you can win
4:33and the other way you simply limit yourself
4:34to managing what there is
4:36and you play and well no, you play, you don't
4:37play with risk, you get into...
4:39playing without money
4:40, you make all kinds of bets,
4:41you do all kinds of things
4:43, what does it matter?
4:44you start building pharaonic airports
4:46, you start creating all kinds
4:47of companies, you start doing all kinds of...
4:50subsidizing all kinds of things
4:51, why? because the money is not yours
4:53so what does it matter whether you win or lose?
4:54There is no incentive to save
4:57or to do it well,
4:58there is no win or loss, so...
5:01the essential element
5:03of the market economy is missing
5:04, which is the calculation of benefits and costs.
5:10If the calculation of benefits and costs is missing,
5:13we have no human way of directing
5:17production.
5:18What should be produced,
5:21how should it be produced?
5:23We don't know,
5:24lacking that private property,
5:26in that form of the game,
5:27we don't know if we should...
5:29We don't have any kind of rational criteria
5:32, nor do we have the necessary information, for example,
5:35to know if we should invest more
5:36or less in education,
5:37more in health care or less,
5:39more in public works or less,
5:40more in justice or less
5:45because we don't know,
5:46we don't have the information
5:48as to which sector
5:50society really demands,
5:52and the criteria for the administration of these goods
5:55are purely political,
5:58they respond to pressure
5:59from groups
6:00or they respond to who
6:01at any given time is occupying the apparatus
6:04or the positions of power
6:05in that hypothetical structure
6:07that we call the State
6:10, in other words, we lack... that is the main thing,
6:14we don't know
6:15if we have to have more courts
6:17or fewer courts,
6:18we don't know if we have to have more schools
6:20or fewer schools,
6:21the criteria are merely quantitative,
6:23we don't know if we have to expand
6:24the Aurora airport
6:25or reduce it
6:29, We know, even
6:31if a public company
6:32makes a profit or a loss
6:35because the cost and benefit calculations
6:38of public companies and organizations
6:39are merely accounting,
6:42they are not business-related,
6:45any public company
6:48or public administration
6:49properly financed
6:53can make a surplus, there is no limit, I mean...
6:55and vice versa,
6:57any public company
6:58with financing it
6:59certainly gives little deficit
7:01, but what is the...
7:02because they are not financed
7:03with voluntary contributions
7:04but with political contributions
7:05, whether it is in deficit
7:06or what is...
7:08or that benefits
7:09are merely a matter
7:10of the budgets
7:11assigned to it at any given time,
7:13there is no type of accounting calculation, that is to say,
7:15the Aurora airport earned...
7:1810 million quetzales and spent 11,
7:22there is a loss
7:25or...
7:27a public company
7:30earned 12 million quetzales and spent 10
7:34in that company, there are benefits
7:37, there is no profit or loss, it
7:40simply depends on a contribution
7:42, the profit, the loss
7:44are merely accounting,
7:45there is no profit, a real loss
7:47simply depends
7:48on whether the original allocation
7:50is sufficient or not to maintain that device...
7:54whether or not that device is the correct one, is not We know
7:56if the budget allocation we give
7:59is correct or not,
8:00we do not know,
8:03nor can we know,
8:06two, then
8:07the second point that we are going to touch on here
8:12economic calculation
8:13I've already told some of you about this
8:17here,
8:19but it also applies
8:21to public organizations.
8:24Who can explain to me, among those present here ,
8:27what the theorem of the impossibility
8:28of economic calculation is under socialism
8:32? How so?
8:34There are no prices, indeed
8:36. And what is the argument?
8:38As you know,
8:39criticisms of socialism
8:40always come
8:41from the lack of incentives
8:43. The classic criticism of Mallok, for example,
8:46is the criticism that socialism
8:47cannot work due to a lack of incentives.
8:49Criticisms of socialism
8:51always come along these lines:
8:52if everyone earns the same
8:54, why should we work
8:55if we're going to earn the same?
8:58It is an absolutely inefficient system
8:59because nobody works, earning the same
9:01is the classic argument
9:03then others introduced like Hayek
9:05for example, in "The Road to Serfdom"
9:07arguments of...
9:08that the State in socialism
9:10has to necessarily be tyrannical
9:14if the State controls
9:15all the means of production
9:17this is an argument
9:18that can also be used against
9:19like a dysfunction of public administration
9:22if the State controls all the means of production
9:24and it is a socialist State
9:25and you want to do
9:27a play
9:29against the regime...
9:31political, where do you do it? Where
9:32do you do the play?
9:36If you want to do a radio program
9:38criticizing
9:39the government ,
9:42where do you broadcast it?
9:44If you want
9:46to educate your children
9:48in other values,
9:49be they religious,
9:50economic,
9:51or moral,
9:52where do you educate them?
9:57If you want to publish a newspaper
9:59, how do you publish it?
10:03So
10:04to the extent
10:05that the State
10:06monopolizes
10:07some type of social area
10:11it simply restricts freedoms
10:13in that social sphere.
10:17If the State monopolizes education
10:21it controls education
10:23even if it leaves the rest of the spheres free.
10:25If it controls the world of money
10:27it eliminates freedom in the use of money,
10:30establishing competing currencies
10:32or establishing interest rates different
10:34from those set by the central bank, etc., that is to say,
10:36in this aspect we already see a dysfunction
10:38of the administration that...
10:40eliminates
10:42freedoms
10:43in two ways
10:44, one, because it forces you
10:45to finance it forcibly and coercively
10:48and it is financed
10:50by restricting
10:52your freedom
10:53because if resources are taken away from you
10:54it means that your freedom of action is...
10:58diminished or reduced
11:01simply because
11:02taking away resources from you
11:03is taking away from you
11:04areas or aspects of freedom.
11:06It means that from now on
11:07if you were planning to take a trip
11:08you can no longer do it.
11:09If you were planning to buy a piece of clothing
11:11you can no longer buy it.
11:12If you were planning to eat a certain food
11:14you can no longer buy it because the State
11:15has already taken that resource from you
11:17, that is to say, all extraction of resources
11:18is on the one hand
11:20via taxes
11:22and it restricts your freedom. that way
11:23and the other side
11:24via monopoly
11:26of the provision of services
11:27therefore
11:28it is another problem
11:30this is the second
11:31example of criticism of socialism
11:33socialism as liberticide
11:35but the third argument is raised
11:38by
11:39Maximilian Weber
11:41in a famous
11:42book
11:43called "Economy and Society"
11:44there he points out the problem of calculation
11:46it is pointed out by
11:48a Prime Minister of Holland
11:50called Nicolaas Pierson
11:52who begins to see
11:54what the problem of calculation is
11:55I mean...
11:58he was talking
11:59about how we can exchange cheeses
12:01in a socialist society
12:02, how we can exchange Dutch cheese balls
12:04for German locomotives
12:06. At what ratio are they exchanged? How are they exchanged?
12:08There's an absence of prices
12:09, so how can we...
12:11establish that ratio?
12:12and Pierson was the first to see it
12:14a Russian historian
12:16named Boris Brutskus
12:18also raises once
12:19the Soviet revolution
12:20established establishes the problem of calculation
12:22but above all
12:22Ludwig Edler von Mises
12:27who raises the issue
12:29in a book, a previous article
12:31but above all in a book
12:32called "Socialism"
12:33raises the problem
12:34of the economic impossibility
12:36of socialism
12:38this has an extension
12:40his disciple
12:41Murray Rothbard
12:42in a book "Man, Economy and State"
12:44dedicates a chapter
12:45to extending
12:47the argument
12:48of the impossibility of economic calculation
12:49not only to the socialist economy
12:51but to the large corporation or the large company
12:53saying that a company
12:54beyond a certain size cannot grow
12:56a company beyond
12:57a certain size
12:59cannot calculate either
13:01and that is why in capitalism
13:02small companies
13:04systematically
13:05eat up large companies
13:07and that is how it should be
13:08unlike what many of you think
13:11it is the other way around
13:12because the small company
13:14plans better, calculates better
13:15compared to the large company
13:17that becomes a dinosaur
13:18incapable of surviving in the market
13:20and it is a process
13:21of dynamic creation
13:24but then the calculation argument
13:25can be extended further
13:26it can extend to empires
13:27and above all it can be extended
13:28to public policies
13:30and public administrations.
13:32Public administrations,
13:33as we saw before,
13:34are partial socialisms.
13:37They are areas of the socialized economy,
13:39that is, they do not have private property
13:42and therefore, they are
13:44inescapably subject
13:46to all the restrictions that
13:48the theory of economic calculation has in socialism.
13:52From a certain scale,
13:54public companies
13:56do not have prices
13:57and they lack internal prices
13:58and they cannot calculate. And when I say
14:00that they cannot calculate, for example,
14:02in the field of education
14:05, how much education should there be?
14:07What quality should this education be?
14:10Until what age should education be?
14:11Where should education be provided?
14:14These are questions that
14:16the market easily resolves.
14:17The State is not capable of
14:18politically assigning a price...
14:21not a price, it assigns
14:23a quantity, a quality
14:25and a service...
14:26based on political criteria without any type of information.
14:29It is more obvious
14:30in the world of money itself.
14:34The world of money,
14:36ladies and gentlemen
14:37, is it private or public?
14:39Is the world of money socialist or capitalist?
14:41What do you think?
14:47Who dares to answer?
14:50The world of money, yes,
14:53capitalist, why?
15:02Well...
15:04the question I ask you is the following:
15:05Who determines...
15:07the quantity of money
15:08that must be in the economy?
15:10Who determines the price
15:11that said money must have?
15:13Who determines the quality of said money?
15:19Can consumers,
15:21the State
15:23, pay with gold and silver here?
15:27Can they pay with gold and silver?
15:29Can they pay with...
15:33with coins, I don't know, from Holland
15:35, no, with coins from...
15:36from Sweden, for example
15:37? Can they pay with kroner there?
15:40In Guatemala, what currency should they use?
15:44In quetzales, and why?
15:46Because it's legal tender.
15:49It's called legal tender.
15:51Each state monopolizes the creation of money,
15:54determines what is money and what isn't.
15:58For example, it determines that gold and silver
16:00can't be monetized.
16:02It determines that, it decrees that the only valid currency
16:04is the quetzal. Be careful!
16:05But not just the paper quetzal
16:07but the bank quetzal
16:10. In other words, when you use a credit card
16:14you are transferring money from your account
16:16to the merchant's account
16:17, but... I mean...
16:18bank money, bank deposits
16:21are considered exactly the same
16:24as money
16:24. In other words, an accounting entry
16:26is worth it so that you can give them clothes,
16:28give them food,
16:28give them cars,
16:29give them rides
16:30, give them all kinds of things.
16:31That is a degradation
16:34of the quality of money,
16:37especially because a good part of that money
16:38is created "ex novo."
16:39It is newly created money,
16:41but the State determines that this new money
16:43is also money
16:45through the so-called "banking multiplier."
16:47So, the State manages
16:50education, healthcare, public works.
16:54How many roads should there be in Guatemala?
16:56How many schools should there be?
16:58How many universities should there be?
17:01Especially primary schools
17:02. How much money should there be in Guatemala?
17:04What price should it have?
17:07The central bank also sets the price of money
17:10through rediscounting
17:15. And how does it know that this price is correct?
17:19How can you know?
17:23There is no information
17:24, since there is no private property,
17:26we do not know if that price is correct or not,
17:27we do not know if the schools, justice,
17:29health, the roads that exist
17:31are the correct ones or not
17:32and if they have the adequate price or not,
17:34if there are too few
17:35or too many, it is not known
17:38and there we have the main dysfunction,
17:40that is why governments do not function well
17:42because they do not have
17:43any type of reference
17:45with which to determine,
17:47they calculate
17:48by imitation,
17:49they calculate by memory
17:50and above all they calculate by politics
17:52according to the pressure
17:54of the interests or the powers
17:55that exist at any given moment
17:56in Guatemalan society.
17:59If there is a government...
18:01of the left, well,
18:03they will assert their strength, unions
18:05, certain political actors
18:07that will pressure for certain ends .
18:10If the right governs,
18:11well, there will be other actors
18:12that pressure for other specific
18:15ends
18:16, but in any case, for them
18:17the allocation criterion is political
18:21, not economic, there is no calculation,
18:25and if calculation works at all
18:27, and if those types of sectors work at all,
18:29it is because the rest of the economy
18:32is not socialized
18:33and therefore can shed
18:35some kind of light, I mean,
18:37an educational
18:39administration,
18:40if it has a reference
18:42that there are private schools,
18:43it knows more or less
18:44How much can education cost
18:46if there is a private university?
18:47Do you know more or less
18:48how much can education cost
18:49if there are other countries in the world?
18:51Do you know more or less
18:52how the prices of things
18:53can be set ?
18:54And in fact, the Russian communists,
18:58to set their prices,
19:01took the catalog
19:03of a large American department store ,
19:04looked at the prices of things
19:06and solved their equations with that
19:10, or did they resort to black markets
19:13to set the price of things
19:14, or in any case did they resort to memory?
19:19This is more or less clear. This
19:21is the first argument.
19:23Public administration is a
19:25socialist entity,
19:26it is a socialist part of social life.
19:28Therefore, it is subject to all
19:30the problems
19:32of socialism,
19:33the same applies to defense,
19:34the same applies to the police, etc.
19:36How much defense does Guatemala have to have?
19:38Does it have too much, too little?
19:40How much police does it have
19:41, too little?
19:42All the classic functions of the State
19:46that are raised
19:48and...
19:48are we acting correctly?
19:49This is the first,
19:51it's not that it's inefficient or inefficient,
19:53it's that it's a calculation problem,
19:54it's a problem, therefore,
19:55the allocation of resources in these cases
19:56is necessarily
19:58poorly done
19:59because we don't know exactly,
20:02we lack some type of market indicator
20:04that tells us that there because the assumption of the vote,
20:07the vote is a bad indicator
20:10to allocate public resources,
20:16therefore...
20:20we enter into questions already...
20:22it is another effect of socialism
20:23in questions of scale
20:25or questions of size,
20:26what is the correct scale of the State
20:28, what is the scale...
20:30what is the correct dimension of the State, then
20:32the State normally has a tendency to grow
20:35given that it doesn't...
20:38have market indicators,
20:40it doesn't grow or it
20:41doesn't decrease according to
20:45the product that a
20:46company or commercial offers
20:48in the market , a store , a department store , well, it
20:51grows or decreases ,
20:52it has more benefits or more benefits
20:53depending on the product that it offers
20:55, it satisfies consumers more or less,
20:56in the State there is no such...
21:00dynamic, there is no such mechanism, so
21:02the process of growth, decrease
21:04is basically due to political questions
21:07, that is, those stronger actors try
21:11in the government, they try to expand
21:13their scope of action
21:15to civil society
21:16and In fact, there is an expansive tendency...
21:21in the face of civil administration, then
21:22there are problems of interventionism
21:24the State increasingly intervenes
21:27in more social areas,
21:28it intervenes through policies
21:32in the labor market,
21:33it intervenes through policies
21:35in the environment,
21:36it intervenes through policies
21:38in the historical heritage
21:40and it is gradually
21:42increasing its power of action
21:46in all areas of
21:50social life,
21:51it is gradually increasing
21:53its power
21:55of intervention
21:58in the areas of social life
21:59and there we see it, for example, the State
22:01likes
22:03to control the prices of things,
22:05it likes to set a price, remove it, etc.
22:10the price of bread, the price of food, etc.
22:12He likes to legislate on the environment,
22:14all of this implies
22:15an enormous increase in his power,
22:19he increases his capacity
22:21to act in those areas and...
22:23he expropriates private property
22:25area by area , now
22:27your private property is no longer yours
22:29because before... changing it
22:32you have to do an environmental study
22:34so that your house is not altered
22:36or...
22:37if you have some kind of artistic heritage ,
22:40as Professor Garín told me before,
22:43if you have some kind of artistic heritage in your house
22:45or inherited it or something like that
22:47, then your artistic heritage is not yours,
22:49it belongs to the government.
22:50If they were to inventory it,
22:51they can take it away
22:52based on principles of national interest
22:54and all of this creates
22:55an incentive to grow.
22:57There are two reasons that explain
22:59two dynamics that explain
23:01this growth mechanism,
23:04this bureaucratic imperialism
23:06. For example, a man named Parkinson explains it
23:10when he talks about bureaucracies and he tells us that
23:14the bureaucratic interest is to grow.
23:17If I am a policeman,
23:22I am a civil servant
23:24. What is the easiest way to get promoted?
23:27Or that I have more power?
23:28That I have more subordinates
23:30, that my income increases,
23:31let's say, on the supply
23:34side.
23:35How is that done?
23:38simply if
23:40the scope of intervention
23:43is expanded
23:45I will suddenly have new subordinates
23:48and if I have new subordinates
23:49since I am more senior I will have a chance to win
23:52and therefore I will have a chance to have more resources
23:53for example
23:54the State is very interested
23:57in criminalizing behaviors,
24:02behaviors that historically were free
24:04the State is gradually criminalizing them
24:09and there is an interest, for example
24:10in the United States they told me these days
24:12there is an enormous
24:13prison lobby
24:15the United States
24:16has hundreds of thousands, a million and a bit prisoners
24:19I mean
24:20and there is a prison lobby
24:21in charge of ensuring there are many prisoners
24:23because they live off there being many prisoners
24:24if there are few prisoners their function is not justified
24:27many police forces need there to be many crimes
24:30if not there is no function
24:32I mean... and you see a
24:35slow expansion of what is criminal, for example
24:38drugs, for example
24:39until 1910 you bought...
24:42heroin for example, it was bought...
24:44not only was it bought in any store
24:46it was advertised in the press
24:49cocaine*
24:50it was even advertised by the Pope himself
24:56selling cocaine wine* Mariani
24:58there is propaganda with the Pope
25:01as a claim for consumers
25:02heroin* was used for syrup for children
25:05and was sold everywhere
25:07and so were all drugs, in Spain...
25:09opium* could be bought in any tobacconist
25:11with tobacco, with the rest of the things
25:12without any problem
25:13but suddenly someone decided to criminalize that and created...
25:16a perverse dynamic
25:18to criminalize more and more things because it doesn't stop...
25:21if you look not at
25:23the criminalization or the prohibition
25:28in those drugs of 1910
25:30but any new medication that
25:33those who govern
25:34decide should be prohibited
25:36goes on a list
25:37and they decide it
25:41happens with prostitution,
25:43it happens with a lot of human behaviors
25:45that little by little are being criminalized
25:47and what's the business for them?
25:48the first business that exists is what I mentioned,
25:50an industry is created around that
25:52and hundreds of thousands of people
25:54who live
25:55off the criminalization or expansion of the State
25:58in those areas...
25:59for example, in the world of money, in the world of work,
26:02they create a lot of inspectors
26:04, they create a lot of accountants, they create a lot of people
26:07who are dedicated to controlling these types of things
26:09in tax collection,
26:10they create an administration
26:12that is interested in as many taxes and regulations as there are
26:15so they can... control it,
26:17that is a perverse dynamic of the State
26:20, it is a dynamic of expansion
26:23of the State
26:24and it expands, one, for good, I mean...
26:27we have an interest in the more things
26:29the State intervenes in,
26:31the more possibilities we have of rising,
26:32the more power I will have
26:34as a politician
26:36and the more power I will rise as a police officer, as a bureaucrat, etc.
26:39The more police there are,
26:40the easier it is for me to be promoted to police chief,
26:43the easier it is for me
26:44to get a pay raise.
26:46This is the first, it is a policy of bureaucratic expansion
26:49, but two...
26:50we already relate it to another issue,
26:55not everything...
26:59the performance of the State, let's say,
27:01is in the light
27:02, the performance of the State, apart from these benefits, let's say, "white"
27:06that the State offers, offers many black benefits.
27:10I mean...
27:12the State is an enormous source of income
27:14or state intervention is an enormous source of black income,
27:17it is an enormous source of illegal income,
27:22for example, in many countries of the world.
27:26more than 50% of the police
27:32are involved in drug trafficking*
27:36Spain without going any further, a good part, when...
27:38the times of smuggling, the times of drug trafficking*, a good part of...
27:42entire police stations were arrested
27:45for having relations with drug trafficking*
27:49a good part of the police
27:51in many countries of the world
27:53were involved in prostitution businesses
27:58or are involved in human trafficking businesses,
28:04normally those who protected... brothels
28:07in many countries of the world are the police
28:09who protect drug trafficking
28:12in many places in the world are police.
28:14I'm not saying that all police are dedicated to that
28:17but I say that it is an enormous source of income
28:21for politicians
28:23and bureaucrats
28:25because benefits can be extracted in "a"
28:29and benefits can be established in "b"
28:33not all obviously, but it is a source, in fact,
28:36who are the main enemies of the decriminalization of these things?
28:44the narcos...
28:46and their allies in the government,
28:49in all governments, in all police forces and bureaucracies,
28:53are the main enemies because they are left without business
28:56, so there we have it...
28:59outlined... this is explained by a man named Bruce Benson
29:02in a book called "Justice Without a State,"
29:03obviously I'm not putting all politicians in the same bag, etc., etc., but...
29:07that there are some... that they are corrupt and that they do these things, yes...
29:10we all know
29:12that doesn't mean that they are all corrupt, because yes, there are some...
29:14and these people are interested in the expansion of the State
29:17because here we have another element,
29:18the question... in the environment, in all these types of things, there is this way
29:26because the consequence of what I'm saying is the phenomenon of corruption
29:32. What causes corruption?
29:37Who dares to say it?
29:42Where is there corruption?
29:44In the...
29:48excuse me?
29:50Where is there money? No
29:53, where is there? What did I hear up there?
29:56Where it is limited, where there is something
29:58regulated or limited by the State,
30:01is there a black market...
30:04or corruption in the pen market?
30:07For example
30:09, is there
30:11corruption...
30:12in the sugar market, or in the...
30:15or in saccharin?
30:22Where is there corruption?
30:24Where is the money? As you say
30:26, where is the business?
30:28In which sectors is there corruption?
30:31For example, in urban planning,
30:34can you build a house...
30:37wherever you want, as high as you want, and in any color you want...
30:40and however you want?
30:42No...
30:43And what does that mean?
30:45What do you require to build a house
30:49?
30:51A permit
30:52, and does that permit cost money? Yes or no?
30:57And if there's money
30:58, there's already an incentive for corruption. In fact,
31:01I don't know about here, in my country, the most corrupt politicians are...
31:05systematically in the area of urban planning
31:08, which is where the politician's signature is worth money.
31:11In other words, corruption occurs...
31:15in any sector
31:19that is intervened
31:20because if a person wants to do something,
31:22wants to do some kind of activity,
31:24someone will stop them. They
31:26will do the math and see if it's worth it to bribe
31:30the politician or the official to carry out that function.
31:35And the more regulated and intervened an economy is,
31:38the more corruption there will be.
31:43The same thing happens with mafias.
31:45What mafias do is cover
31:48some kind of area of...
31:51where are there mafias?
31:53For example, in the United States
31:55, in teddy bears?
31:57In...
31:59in the... in the...
32:03in pencils?
32:05In mineral water?
32:07Where is the mafia
32:08? What does the mafia do?
32:10What products does the mafia offer for buying and selling?
32:14How?
32:16Weapons, why?
32:18Because they're... prohibited.
32:21If you... What other products are there mafias?
32:27drugs* and what's so special about drugs*?
32:29drugs* are a chemical product like any other chemical product
32:32any slightly advanced factory can make any type of drug*
32:36any pharmacist is capable of making a drug*
32:39what's the problem with drugs*?
32:42they are prohibited
32:44but despite being prohibited people
32:47continue to demand drugs*
32:49and since they continue to demand drugs*
32:51the mafia appears to offer them drugs
32:55or they gamble...
32:57or other types of goods
32:58that at any given time are prohibited in...
33:00in Cuba, for example, according to what they told me
33:02there was a black market for condensed milk
33:08and there was a black market
33:09condensed milk was used as currency
33:11and milk...
33:12condensed milk being a state monopoly
33:14and you not being able to buy condensed milk
33:16it becomes black market trafficking
33:20black markets sell any type of good
33:24as long as it's prohibited
33:26or what do you think in Venezuela now there are no black markets?
33:29of bread or any basic product
33:32of oil or something like that but since prices are controlled
33:34there are black markets for that type of goods
33:36and I'm sure if here
33:37they put a price on any good
33:39or regulate any good
33:41they will ipso facto have a
33:44black market
33:44then, we have...
33:48the point of view
33:50of corruption
33:51, corruption
33:52has to be analyzed in this way
33:55corruption is basically due to a lack of property rights
33:58and an excess of state intervention
34:00in some specific area
34:03of social life
34:06and whenever they prohibit something in this way
34:09they will generate some type of black market or corruption
34:12and this is a perverse dynamic of the State
34:14corruption many times people blame the markets, this thing like that, no!
34:18Corruption is derived from the lack of markets,
34:25it is an element that later, if you want, we can elaborate another third,
34:31maximizing
34:32another third problem of state intervention
34:35of those that we pointed out at the beginning
34:38is a... a couple of phrases
34:42that the old and deceased
34:45Aaron Wildavsky
34:48explained in a famous book
34:49called "Speaking truth to Power"
34:51"Speaking truth to power"
34:52"The Art and Craft of Policy Analysis"
34:55he said...
34:57in the public sector there is a curious paradox,
35:00a curious and perverse dynamic
35:03that the worse, the better,
35:12and as I was saying, for example,
35:15my city,
35:16I am from a city called Santiago de Compostela,
35:20I am Galician,
35:25well in my city they did a ranking
35:29a few years ago, if I remember correctly
35:33and it came out... I'm speaking from memory,
35:37it came out that in my city,
35:38the city of its size of 100,000 inhabitants and such
35:41between 100,000 and a number of inhabitants
35:43came out as...
35:46the safest city in all of Spain
35:49by number of crimes and...
35:51assaults and things like that, it was the safest city in Spain
35:56and another ranking came out,
35:59I think it was, I'm speaking from memory
36:02Seville, Valencia, let's say Valencia is the city
36:05with the highest crime rate
36:07per 1,000 inhabitants
36:10... well, the question
36:12I ask you is...
36:13what award did the Santiago police...
36:17the Santiago law enforcement officers receive for doing so well in Santiago?
36:21I suppose the police also had something to do with that...
36:25public services,
36:26contrary to what you think,
36:27are not the same everywhere.
36:29There are good universities
36:31and bad universities,
36:32even though they are all public,
36:33there are good police forces and bad police forces, even though they are all public,
36:36and there are good doctors and bad doctors,
36:39even though they are all public,
36:41there is a difference in quality
36:43that is lower than the private sector,
36:45but there is still quality
36:47up to that point, okay?
36:48What award did the Santiago police get for doing things right...
36:51and what punishment did the Valencia police get for doing them so badly?
36:56Let's see...
36:57who dares to answer this?
36:59What award did the police in my city get for doing things right?
37:05Indeed, they cut their budget
37:07and the number of personnel.
37:09They said: "You're already doing well, there's no need to spend so much on police."
37:13And what punishment did Valencia get for doing things wrong?
37:18What horrible punishment did they give them?
37:22More budget and more police.
37:25If a university, hospital, or something similar works well,
37:29people don't complain and it operates according to costs, it's economical, etc.
37:33What award do they give them?
37:36cut it... and if one works terribly
37:41because they are managed by political criteria,
37:44the one that works well does not cause problems
37:47Albert Otto Hirschman
37:49is an American theorist
37:50, economist, political scientist, sociologist,
37:53he has a book called "Exit, Voice and Loyalty"
37:56the market world works by exit,
38:00that is to say, if I don't like a store
38:02I leave and that's it,
38:04I don't go back in it
38:07, it works by exit, simply, there is no conflict
38:10if we are not served well in a store we say good afternoon and we don't come back,
38:13there is no...
38:14normally we tend to use the exit mechanism
38:16in the State there is no possible exit mechanism
38:20whether you like it or not you have to pay for the service
38:22and in many cases
38:23you have to pay for education
38:24even if you pay for university, the private sector has to finance public education for others
38:28apart from that
38:29but apart from that if not...
38:30if they have a monopoly, for example, in justice
38:32if you don't like that justice, where do you go?
38:36you have nowhere to go
38:41then...
38:43what happens?
38:44In the public sector the mechanism used is that of the voice
38:47as Hirschman explains,
38:49that is... revolts, protests, demonstrations...
38:53all kinds of acts of this style
38:56because the government
38:57as I explained many times
38:58is force and pure force
39:00and the government being force and pure force
39:03does not respond to economic arguments
39:04but only responds to force and pure force.
39:09So, if a public sector
39:12works badly, like the police, a hospital,
39:14people will protest,
39:16will demonstrate,
39:17will use force,
39:18will demand their rights
39:19and the government, being sensitive to that
39:20, will take away from those who do
39:23not bother... and give to those who bother
39:27. It is an absolutely perverse incentive
39:29that totally contracts
39:30the market.
39:31If one sector works well the others imitate it
39:34and the resources in the market
39:36through the mechanism of profit
39:39and loss,
39:39resources go
39:40from the sectors that work worse
39:42to the sectors that work better.
39:43In the public sector it is the other way around,
39:45they go from where they work better
39:46to where they work...
39:49worse
39:52. And there is another perverse incentive
39:58that Wildavsky explains to us,
40:04this is...
40:05that problems
40:07shine more
40:09the smaller they are
40:11and are about to disappear,
40:13therefore, priorities are confused.
40:19What am I referring to?
40:22When is there more hunger in the world?
40:24Now or...
40:26or before?
40:31Before,
40:31there was never less hunger in the world than today,
40:34there was never less illiteracy in the world than today
40:37, there was never less abuse of women
40:39, and look what I'm saying
40:40, today
40:46, and I'm aware of what I'm saying
40:47and I'm aware that it's a serious problem in your country
40:50as in all countries in the world
40:52, but even so...
40:54and although it is a serious problem, a very serious problem,
40:57it is a problem that has been greatly reduced,
40:59for example, compared to 100 years ago,
41:01a lot
41:03, but what's happening?
41:03that in politics it shines more
41:05the smaller
41:07the problem is
41:09and this lack of vision
41:11leads us to forget the big problems
41:13and we focus
41:14on the problems that shine.
41:15I don't want to say that this isn't a problem,
41:16of course it is a problem and a very serious one,
41:17but I am saying that the problem,
41:19if you look closely, shines more
41:22when the abuse is less,
41:23not when it is more intense.
41:25I mean...
41:27unfortunately, for example,
41:29in Spain 200 years ago or so
41:31, killing a woman or something like that
41:32wasn't even a crime
41:37, and today, thank God,
41:39it is a crime and it is persecuted,
41:40but it is persecuted. It can be persecuted
41:42precisely because it is small,
41:44just as illiteracy can be persecuted
41:46because it is small,
41:49just as hunger
41:50can be treated
41:52because hunger is
41:54dramatically reducing in size.
41:57But that, of course, is something
41:58that has its logic
42:00, but it leads to neglecting
42:02social problems of another kind
42:04, which leads to a...
42:07to a miscalculation of the problems
42:10precisely. So, the problem shines more
42:13when it is smaller and that
42:15often leads to thinking
42:17that we are worse off than ever...
42:20or to addressing different measures
42:22when we are addressing these problems
42:28and following this...
42:30this issue...
42:33well, I'll leave you with you guys can discuss
42:34because I see that...
42:35they told me to speak for 45 minutes and I
42:37explicitly fulfilled it
42:38now I would like if you want to answer
42:42the questions that...
42:43that you may have or discuss with me if you want
42:45if you do not agree with what I said
42:46or to develop some topic
42:47let's see what kind of students the EPRI has
42:49I want to see my students
42:51to see how Edu educates his students
42:53that's why I came here to see...
42:55if he has them well raised or not
42:57if these people who are here in front of
42:58you have you well raised or not
43:02let's see, come on, start...
43:08if you're not going to make these gentlemen look bad
43:11and I'm going to laugh at them after
43:15that Edu I'm also going to scold
43:17you I'm going to tell you what kind of people you have here
43:20if this is a school of politics
43:22or is it a dressmaking academy
43:26let's see miss, tell me
43:28what is your opinion, for example...
43:31regarding the crash of '29 in the United States
43:34and how they resolved it because imagine
43:36in the end it comes to that
43:37despite the fact that there are many factors
43:38that influenced at that time
43:40we can also say that...
43:43politics [Unintelligible]
43:46the American presidents
43:47led it like to... [Unintelligible]
43:51and on the other hand
43:52after this we see that
43:54Roosevelt with the New Deal managed to...
43:57managed to get the United States ahead until...
44:00let's say the economic boom
44:01that it had at a certain moment in history that...
44:04Roosevelt did not get the country out of the crisis
44:06Roosevelt transformed a
44:07relatively short recession
44:08into a great depression of 12 years
44:10precisely because of that type of thing
44:12and the Great Depression did not emerge
44:13until the end of the world war
44:15if you notice
44:16the public policies that were carried out
44:18were those that aggravated the crisis
44:19in a crisis of that style you don't have to do anything
44:22compare the crisis of 1929 with the crisis of 1920
44:27do you know it?
44:29the one of 1920... what happened?
44:34how?
44:36There were two almost consecutive crises
44:37in 1920 and in 1929
44:40we only studied the Crash of 29
44:44because it lasted so long.
44:45The crisis of 1920 was more brutal
44:48but nobody remembers it
44:49because it was cured in months
44:51in a crisis. What we have to do is...
44:52we have to do nothing,
44:53we have to let the assets be liquidated,
44:55let the companies go bankrupt.
44:56that banks go bankrupt
44:58that prices adjust and deflate
45:00and recover from sound principles
45:02the American government of Roosevelt
45:04did not follow a policy of "laissez faire"
45:06simply began to do
45:08what they now call "stimulus"
45:10before Keynes
45:11before Keynes already began to do them
45:14and failed to do anything
45:15because it can't do anything
45:16the economy has to heal and recover
45:18and the stimulus policies
45:20did was waste
45:22the few healthy public resources that existed
45:24in saving bankrupt industries
45:28Do you know the Austrian theory of cycles?
45:34of economic cycles
45:35Have you not read Hayek on the subject?
45:37A book by Mises, the first to discuss it
45:39, called "The Theory of Money and Credit,"
45:42or the works on the Great Depression by Lionel Robbins,
45:45or
45:46Rothbard's "The Great American Depression,"
45:49which is about to come out in Spanish now . [Unintelligible]
46:03Yes... for us, the crisis
46:05is precisely a crisis of economic calculation
46:08, of economic calculation
46:11. The State...
46:13doesn't know what price to put on money
46:17and sets a price on the interest rate.
46:19And the politics of the 1920s,
46:21whatever Milton Friedman and Anna Schwartz may say,
46:23whatever they may say
46:25in "An Economic History of the United States,"
46:27there was a credit expansion in the 1920s,
46:31poorly measured by them,
46:36a drop in the interest rate
46:39. Why is the interest rate important?
46:41The interest rate is a market,
46:43it's a price that tells us many things
46:45. And what does the interest rate tell us?
46:46A high interest rate
46:47tells you
46:48there is no capital available...
46:50you can't invest...
46:52you can't buy new machines... you ca
46:53n't buy factories...
46:54you can't buy a car...
46:56you can't expand your house...
46:57Why? Because there isn't one
46:58. And how do we know there isn't one?
47:00Because of the high interest rate
47:02, a low interest rate. What does that tell you?
47:03On the contrary,
47:04you can expand productive activity,
47:06you can buy new machines,
47:07you can buy a new car,
47:09you can expand your house.
47:11That's in a free market.
47:12If the State sets a price for money
47:14and artificially lowers it
47:16, what happens?
47:19that there is a massive miscalculation
47:23people start buying tractors,
47:25they start buying houses,
47:27they start buying assets
47:29that they can't finance,
47:32there comes a time when this becomes visible
47:33and there is a massive bankruptcy
47:35of the company
47:36and that massive bankruptcy implies a consumption of capital
47:39. I mean, the economy of that country
47:43after the crisis is 20, 25% poorer,
47:48what is normally done is
47:49deflate wages,
47:51deflate prices,
47:52let bankrupt industries go bankrupt
47:54, not invest one more quetzal in bankrupt industries
47:58and start the recovery
47:59from a lower point of view
48:00but with full employment and returning to...
48:03healthy growth,
48:06what governments do is
48:07try to save companies,
48:09try to save banks
48:10and consume the little capital that exists in...
48:14saving bankrupt companies
48:16and what that does is aggravate the crisis,
48:17which is what is happening with the European crisis,
48:20it's been going on for years and it doesn't look like it's going to end
48:22because they are doing everything possible
48:24to prevent it from ending
48:26with policies
48:28like the Keynesian one of Milton Friedman,
48:31he is the one who gives his name to this classroom
48:33, what?
48:36On the issue of national security
48:38, which, as we all know, is a state monopoly
48:40, would you recommend privatizing it?
48:43It's always been private, miss,
48:49but let's say, obeying the...
48:52the theory, let's say, of the modern state.
48:54In which it's important for
48:56central power to regain power, right?
49:00Even this, let's see, the Roman troops
49:01that were, private or mercenaries?
49:03Were they mercenaries or were they state troops?
49:04Mercenary troops,
49:06the troops that conquered...
49:08that fought in Europe, even those that came here, what were they?
49:1170% of current espionage
49:13was mercenary.
49:15What is it, private or public?
49:17Private
49:20, I mean... now let's go...
49:22there's nothing strange
49:24about private defense; in fact, that's what
49:26El Cid Campeador is like. Have you ever heard of him?
49:30del Cid... el Cid was a mercenary
49:34he even worked for the Moors
49:39the defense and the police
49:42were always private
49:45there was no problem at all
49:46and they worked much better
49:47in their function
49:48and much less harmful
49:49much less criminal
49:51than the armies of the State
49:54they have another example the corsairs
49:55the corsairs are good private soldiers
49:59the corsairs are for example, you...
50:01charter your own ship
50:03the only difference is that the State gives you a patent
50:05and you dedicate yourself to conquering the English or...
50:08or people of Belize
50:12that is a business
50:13but you do not have to set up a state bureaucracy
50:16it is you who fight the others
50:18and you as a good corsair
50:20or as a good mercenary
50:22would kill much less people
50:24because a mercenary would kill much less people
50:29I just wanted to give an example
50:31landing a little on the Guatemalan case
50:34currently we have 150,000
50:39who would be from private security
50:41yes...
50:42on the other hand in security already
50:45in the public sector they are...
50:47I think if I'm not mistaken there are 39 officers
50:50yes...
50:51so if we can see
50:52there is a profound acceleration
50:54in what is the private security
50:55yes...
50:56and even so the security rates
50:59in our country continue to be very high
51:02to a certain extent
51:03the citizens
51:04do not have a good perception of security
51:07so, how does that reality or those numbers...
51:12can't indicate that the theory
51:14that everything should be private is not the reality,
51:17not that I don't say that it was...
51:20yes but I mean...
51:21and it continues to be,
51:22I think the question is also
51:24why is there that private security?
51:26Public security doesn't work so well, so
51:28why is there private security?
51:29yes...
51:30well, that is as a result of the peace treaties of 96
51:33when they wanted to decentralize
51:35what was going to be the National Civil Police
51:37because it was, well it was created in fact, and...
51:41they wanted to partially reduce the budget
51:44and the armed forces
51:46to generate another mechanism
51:48yes...
51:49that was obviously different from what...
51:52the situation that was before
51:53during the guerrilla times and etc.
51:55I mean, we'll have to start there.
51:57There's private security, probably because...
51:59for whatever reasons,
52:01stemming from a war, there's a population,
52:03an excerpt from the population, or thousands of people
52:06accustomed to fighting.
52:07It's a society, let's say, more violent
52:09than other societies.
52:11So, as a more violent society,
52:12people demand more security.
52:14It has to do with
52:15why people demand more security here,
52:18not why it works well or badly
52:19. Why do people demand more security
52:21here than
52:22in other countries?
52:24Why do you think? I don't know if it's a problem
52:26of... of people demanding security
52:28, but rather a problem of
52:30the State not being able to generate
52:32an efficient security mechanism
52:33. Oh, right!
52:34And in that...
52:35the citizens have found themselves in this problem
52:38of having to resort to their own means,
52:40which has generated a problem.
52:42For example, the illegal forces
52:44that operate in many of the...
52:47departments and municipalities
52:49that are organized and even...
52:52and generate perverse incentives
52:53because when a police officer
52:55tries to go against these
52:58illegal bodies...
53:01there is no process of...
53:04I even think that last year
53:06they killed a member of the National Civil Police
53:09for that very reason, because they believe...
53:11they take justice into their own hands and that is...
53:14in part it goes in accordance with the predatory theory of the State
53:17that we saw
53:20that this theory
53:22has shown how
53:23to the extent that the State monopolizes security
53:26it has generated more security in general terms
53:30you start from the point of view
53:31that the good police are the state
53:32and the bad ones are the other ones,
53:33the legal one is one and the illegal one is the other
53:34and why does it have to be that way?
53:36No, I'm not seeing bad or good but...
53:38I do believe that the monopolization of security
53:40generates greater stability and more security
53:44and you used another concept
53:46that was the one I tried to criticize in this class
53:48an efficient amount of security
53:50and how can you know?
53:52I don't know if I'm explaining myself,
53:53the concept of efficiency is a concept that is...
53:55okay, for a diesel engine,
53:57a diesel engine is efficient
53:59, a locomotive is efficient,
54:01public safety can never be efficient
54:03because there is no paradigm,
54:05there is no benchmark,
54:06there is no single dimension that can be measured.
54:09I can...
54:11I like to give extreme examples
54:13. Let's see, if I kill all the young people
54:15between 15 and 25 years old, do I reduce crime
54:21? Yes or no?
54:23If I kill them all or imprison them all,
54:27I eliminate crime because those are the ages
54:29when people normally commit crimes
54:32. But, would that be efficient?
54:36No, because it would be an enormous injustice
54:38, but there are other indicators of efficiency
54:40, but I mean...
54:43there aren't any...
54:44but they are in contrast.
54:46For example, I...
54:47the most efficient way to end
54:48crime would be that.
54:51Now...
54:52Would it be socially efficient?
54:55Or would it be enormously unfair?
54:58What do you think?
55:00That is to say, efficiency has a lot...
55:02it has many dynamics
55:03, it depends on what the State does.
55:05Efficiency, I repeat, is for an engine
55:08so many liters of gasoline
55:09so much power, that is efficient,
55:11but a public policy is never efficient
55:14because there are many dimensions
55:16and that concept is not clear,
55:17it is a transposition of elements of physics
55:20to social science
55:21and one can never speak of an efficient policy
55:23. Efficient for whom?
55:27That is the question...
55:28Tell me, sir
55:31, oh well, who is there?
55:32Yes, I have a question
55:34regarding, you said that...
55:36the State also prohibits many things
55:38through the enactment of laws, right?
55:40creating laws that prohibit many things
55:43yes...
55:44now
55:45I think that this is related to the paradox that
55:48people, let's say, want more peace
55:50but security is increased or monopolized more
55:55and I wanted to see what you thought
55:57about the alternative let's say...
56:00of removing all those laws that prohibit the things
56:03that people are doing because let's say
56:05it's a positivist system where it
56:07is done from the top down and
56:09the reality of society is not taken into account
56:11effectively
56:12then those laws would not work but rather
56:14work more as a prevention
56:15let's say, that is, preventing...
56:18the... let's say... the drug problems
56:22educating the population
56:24but at the moment, let's say that would be something good let's say, in the future
56:27but, what is done with that crime...
56:29What's happening right now? I mean...
56:31how could it be done?
56:33What would be an alternative to monopolizing it
56:35and creating all that crime?
56:38You talk about something very interesting
56:40and you talk about to what extent
56:43crime is a crime in itself
56:46and the other is a crime created by the State.
56:50Here I obviously don't have data, but...
56:52in European prisons, American prisons,
56:5480% of the prisoners are there for crimes without a victim
56:57, that is, for crimes
56:58that in any ethical code
57:00of natural law
57:01or in any other type of ethical code
57:03would not be a crime
57:04and basically the prisoners are there for drugs,
57:06gambling or prostitution
57:08that anywhere else in the world would not be a crime
57:13and in that aspect it is the law
57:15that causes crime, not the other way around,
57:17it is the law that defines criminal behavior
57:20that is not criminal behavior,
57:22for example...
57:23I was told that for smoking here in Guatemala
57:25they can even put you in jail
57:29and that is an absurd thing
57:30in my humble opinion,
57:33smoking in certain places, it is understood, of course
57:37the law can become confiscatory
57:40or go to those kinds of extremes.
57:42Is that a law of natural law
57:44or is it a law that the State says is criminal?
57:49Eli Heckscher, the historian
57:51tells us in his book "Mercantilism"
57:54that tens of thousands of people
57:56or hundreds, sorry, or thousands of people
57:58were executed in Great Britain
58:00for buying and selling fabrics.
58:03The State had a monopoly on certain fabrics
58:05called Calico
58:06and did not allow the importation of cheaper or better quality
58:08fabrics from other countries.
58:09Anyone caught with any of that fabric
58:11was executed for smuggling.
58:14Are these people criminals or not?
58:17They are criminals because the State decides so,
58:19not because they are criminals per se.
58:21These people are
58:24freely buying and selling a good... they are not harming anyone,
58:26but the State decides that they are harming
58:27anyone, and the State sanctions them
58:29, and the State has an interest
58:30in expanding these types of prohibitions,
58:33either to defend its groups
58:34, or to defend its...
58:36its collectives.
58:38I don't know if that's more or less what you were referring to?
58:47How not to monopolize?
58:51To put an end to
58:54anarchism.
58:55I am one of those who call it "ancap,"
58:57anarcho-capitalist.
58:59I don't know. There must be someone here, I suppose,
59:05who gives the words?
59:07gives Professor Arin, gives the words, let's see...
59:12Well...
59:13completely agreeing
59:14that the State is not a physical figure
59:17but rather a form of social construct
59:19but also accepting
59:20that it has played an important role
59:21in the development of humanity as a...
59:23species and as the...
59:26civilization that...
59:27that we have been able to study over time
59:30touching on a more specific topic
59:32not so much on justice but violence itself
59:34knowing... not entering into the discussion of whether it is a
59:37Hobbesian or Roussonian
59:38vision of humanity
59:40but understanding that violence
59:41has been a tool
59:42and has been something that has been used
59:43as a mechanism to achieve goals
59:46in the early evolutionary stages of humanity
59:48the monopoly of that violence
59:50not so much that the State
59:51is the only one that can execute violence
59:53but in a certain way
59:55positively prohibiting
59:56other people in society
59:58from using it against their neighbors
1:00:01has been something that has allowed us
1:00:03to develop as a civility and as...
1:00:05as a species eventually and build
1:00:07what we have built between city
1:00:08States, countries, whatever... Would
1:00:11the elimination of this State
1:00:12eventually also mean
1:00:14eliminating that monopoly on violence?
1:00:15and give people back that freedom
1:00:19to exercise violence as they please?
1:00:23Look, it's not comparable, but the State,
1:00:25the States during the 20th century
1:00:26killed hundreds of millions of people
1:00:28, yes, but there is a count of private crimes,
1:00:30for example, it seems to me that... uh...
1:00:33about...
1:00:33it seems to me that in the 20th century
1:00:34about 250, 300 million people died
1:00:36by their own States,
1:00:38in wars and so on,
1:00:39but private crimes,
1:00:40it seems to me, were 25 million,
1:00:42a ratio of 10 to 1
1:00:44because crimes are counted
1:00:46and the State is a source of civilization,
1:00:49that is the thesis of...
1:00:50of...
1:00:51of Stuart Mill, I think, right?
1:00:53In "Representative Government,"
1:00:55he defends these things
1:00:57because... let's see...
1:01:00the shepherd watches that his sheep
1:01:03or his goats don't fight among themselves,
1:01:06that they are at peace
1:01:07, and the one who has a chicken coop
1:01:09makes sure that the chickens
1:01:11don't fight among themselves
1:01:13or that the rooster doesn't abuse the chickens.
1:01:15Why?
1:01:20Why does the shepherd protect the sheep from the wolf?
1:01:24Or from the other shepherds?
1:01:27Because he doesn't want another wolf
1:01:28to eat his sheep
1:01:31, and the shepherd doesn't want the sheep to kill each other.
1:01:34Whose loss is it?
1:01:36His...
1:01:38Of course, the State is interested in peace.
1:01:41The more peace there is
1:01:42among the sheep, the more...
1:01:44wool the shepherd can make, right?
1:01:47If the sheep start fighting among ourselves,
1:01:50there would be little wealth and the shepherd could make little.
1:01:54Of course, he's interested in there being peace,
1:01:57but I don't think the chicken or the sheep
1:01:59that's going to be sacrificed would be very happy about...
1:02:02not having fights with the other sheep.
1:02:05I know it's a bit of a risky metaphor
1:02:07, but historically, I'm afraid it was like that
1:02:12, so yes, we return to...
1:02:14that's the predatory theory your partner was talking about. What?
1:02:17that the predatory theory your colleague was talking about
1:02:20goes in that direction,
1:02:22then it does imply returning to that state
1:02:24where only those with the resources
1:02:26and the means to defend themselves
1:02:28do so
1:02:30, yes, of course...
1:02:32that's what I'm returning to because now
1:02:34, what resources do you have against the State?
1:02:38In theory, human rights, let's say
1:02:40human rights and all that...
1:02:41and if you don't want to apply them, what happens to you?
1:02:43Who sanctions them?
1:02:45But I'm not applying it so much to me, the State,
1:02:47but me, the individual
1:02:48, yes, yes, individual, yes...
1:02:49that, purely for my own pleasure, I went to use violence
1:02:51or physical coercion to get what I want
1:02:53from anyone in this classroom.
1:02:55The problem is that those in this classroom
1:02:57, being individuals like yourselves, would have
1:02:59more than enough tools to defend yourselves
1:03:00. They could be armed, for example,
1:03:02they could form a coalition against you
1:03:04if you're stronger, right?
1:03:06I mean, it's hard for a monopoly of that style
1:03:08to emerge. On the other hand,
1:03:10the other way around,
1:03:11a police officer could come here and arrest us all
1:03:14without the ability to respond, right?
1:03:17With a couple of armed men,
1:03:19they'd take us all, right?
1:03:21Yes or no?
1:03:25So, who is the most dangerous?
1:03:29Humans...
1:03:30but that's how humans are.
1:03:31The point is...
1:03:33Locke said it very well:
1:03:35to defend ourselves from the annoyances
1:03:37of foxes and skunks,
1:03:39we fall into the clutches of a lion
1:03:42. Do I make myself clear?
1:03:44Skunks and foxes
1:03:46are our neighbors who annoy us
1:03:48, and to defend ourselves from them,
1:03:49we put ourselves in the clutches of a lion
1:03:51who really does kill us or pluck us.
1:03:53It's a metaphor that Locke used.
1:03:57I mean... the State, I repeat,
1:03:59the State doesn't exist,
1:04:03but it's a necessary metaphor
1:04:05so that you pay taxes and collaborate without...
1:04:08Resistance
1:04:09and denying the possibility of
1:04:11any kind of human cooperation
1:04:12outside of coercion
1:04:13says very little about being human, too.
1:04:21Don't they teach you this here about...
1:04:24predatory theory, they teach you that, right?
1:04:26These things, even
1:04:31if they say
1:04:34it, we're done.
1:04:36I think there was
1:04:38an insinuation in your speech about the fact that
1:04:40in times of crisis
1:04:43there should be non-intervention by the State
1:04:46so that the economy itself can be reborn
1:04:49, but...
1:04:50based on the fact that you mentioned
1:04:52that you are an anarcho-capitalist,
1:04:54I believe that in economic terms
1:04:58what you propose does work,
1:05:00but when we talk about society
1:05:02and who really controls the market,
1:05:05how can we propose
1:05:07if we base ourselves on the fact
1:05:09that the human being himself
1:05:10, and I don't want to sound
1:05:12too Hobbesian either
1:05:13, but...
1:05:15yes, man, we could say,
1:05:17is the wolf of man
1:05:18, and the State arises as a need manifested
1:05:21in different societies
1:05:22to have a specific entity that can regulate
1:05:26actions in which man can become
1:05:28an...
1:05:30apparatus of coercion
1:05:32, but why would the State be an apparatus...
1:05:35in terms of domination
1:05:39and of this coercion?
1:05:42English: Why would the State be more powerful...
1:05:45than what the individual could ever be...
1:05:49when it comes to intervening...
1:05:51and coercing another human being?
1:05:53Because the State is very much in charge
1:05:55of being the monopolist of violence,
1:05:57that is, of being the only one with violence
1:05:59in a territory
1:06:00and for that, in many countries in the world
1:06:02it is the only one that is armed
1:06:03and it is the only one that tolerates others being armed
1:06:05so that they cannot stand up to it.
1:06:08Hayek had a chapter,
1:06:09if you read it, in "The Road to Serfdom"
1:06:12called "Why the Bad Guys Take the Lead."
1:06:14I don't know if you read that book?
1:06:16Well, there's a chapter explaining
1:06:18that in the world of politics, in the world of the State,
1:06:19the worst
1:06:22and most capable of exercising violence normally tend to rule. So,
1:06:25to free ourselves from the inconveniences, I repeat, of our neighbors,
1:06:27we fall into the hands of the worst
1:06:30. In other words, to free ourselves from the inconveniences of a few men, we give all the capacity
1:06:33to use violence to a single person.
1:06:36And I don't quite understand
1:06:37where the logic of that lies
1:06:38. But then, why is it that to this day...
1:06:40people continue to seek refuge in the State
1:06:43and there are no societies
1:06:45that could be called absolutely anarchist
1:06:48where men can manage themselves
1:06:50and live a life...
1:06:53simply because they don't let you
1:06:55see. You all studied in school
1:06:57, I suppose not?
1:06:59No?
1:07:00Did you study at home?
1:07:04Well, how lucky were
1:07:08you in school...
1:07:09Is school in Guatemala compulsory or not?
1:07:13Not
1:07:17on paper, yes
1:07:18, but I'm referring to
1:07:19the content of your education, what does it consist of?
1:07:23What?
1:07:25But, what does the content consist of?
1:07:27What do you study there?
1:07:31History of what?
1:07:34I mean, history of the State
1:07:36, what do they study... how they lived... I don't know...
1:07:39what did Guatemalans eat in the 17th century?
1:07:42Where did they live?
1:07:45What do they study?
1:07:48The State of Guatemala
1:07:50, the presidents of Guatemala,
1:07:51that's what they study.
1:07:52History of the State
1:07:53, geography... What is geography?
1:07:57Rivers, mountains, valleys, where from?
1:08:01From Guatemala, I mean, geography of the State.
1:08:03Geography is the most...
1:08:05manipulative weapon of all
1:08:08the subjects you have
1:08:09. Language... What language do you use?
1:08:12The language of...?
1:08:15And that language, why is it Spanish and not Persian? For example...
1:08:21What is the official language of the State of Guatemala?
1:08:25So, what do they learn in schools?
1:08:28I like
1:08:30the language of the State of Guatemala
1:08:32because Belize, which is right next door,
1:08:33I don't think they learn it
1:08:36, right?
1:08:39They study the ethics of citizenship, right?
1:08:43Don't they study anything about citizenship?
1:08:45That is the ethics of the State.
1:08:48The mathematics they use.
1:08:53The biology they study
1:08:55is the biology of the State
1:08:58because it is the biology that it teaches.
1:09:02I mean...
1:09:03their curriculum content is basically content
1:09:06designed
1:09:07to create obedient citizens,
1:09:09not to teach them things.
1:09:12You don't learn to trade . You
1:09:14don't learn to buy or sell.
1:09:15You don't learn to drive cars.
1:09:16You learn what the State wants you to learn,
1:09:18and it's basically about creating
1:09:20political content.
1:09:21The mathematics you study
1:09:23is the mathematics
1:09:24invented by the Egyptian priests
1:09:27to calculate surfaces
1:09:29to tax them later.
1:09:33Didn't they teach you to calculate surface
1:09:35areas and things like that?
1:09:38Well, that math was invented
1:09:39to calculate land areas
1:09:41so they could be taxed. Then
1:09:45, the State gives them a name and surname,
1:09:48and an address so they can be monitored properly.
1:09:54Professor Santiago has given me
1:09:59a treat.