Autarky: Difference between revisions

From FasciPedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Its my first FasciPedia page, please take a look!)
Tag: visualeditor
 
(I think I accounted for the tone, but links and images are clearly still lacking. Can't really think of anything for the latter two as of now, although I probably can offer citations and references: my sources all come from books that I've read as of now, so.)
Tag: visualeditor
Line 2: Line 2:
Autarky, quite simply, means self-sufficiency, usually through extensive development of home industry.
Autarky, quite simply, means self-sufficiency, usually through extensive development of home industry.


Due to the dominance of what will be called the "free trade ideology" or "liberal capitalism" that sees its roots in Adam Smith, the term autarky has sometimes held a negative connotation, as though nations that pursue autarky are somehow not acting rationally.
Due to the dominance of what is referred to as the "free trade ideology" or "liberal capitalism" that sees its roots in Adam Smith, the author of the well-known ''The Wealth of Nations'', the term autarky has sometimes held a negative connotation, as though nations that pursue autarky are not acting rationally.


What free trade ideologues fail to realize however, is that those who pursue autarky are operating on a logic that is completely alien to the liberal capitalist, who is also a rootless cosmopolitan; the adherents of autarky are not capitalists, but economic nationalists.
Commonly held misconceptions about autarky usually center around arguing how it is more expensive for a nation to manufacture a significant portion of its required goods domestically and is therefore irrational. There are also some arguments that go further and say that autarky thus is the government creating artificial monopolies through government intervention for the benefit of certain private corporations.


== The Logic of Liberal Capitalism ==
Much of this stems from various assumptions held by orthodox economists as well as a misunderstanding of the priorities and viewpoints of those who pursue autarkic policies, who are mostly economic nationalists. This article is written to address such misunderstandings and to explain the logic and purpose of autarky.
A liberal capitalist would believe that man is an egotistic individual who acts in his own economic self-interest. Therefore, the individual comes before the nation, with the nation being only a collection of individuals, therefore what is good for the individual must be good for the nation. To the liberal capitalist, since the individual is motivated by economic self-interest and the pursuit of cheaper goods, therefore logically the entire nation, being merely a collection of individuals, would be better off if they would just export their industry to those nations that can produce those same goods at a cheaper cost.


=== The Fallacious Assumptions and Impracticalities of Liberal Capitalism ===
== The Logic of Adam Smith ==
The first that must be addressed is the conception of human nature as laid out by Adam Smith, that of ''Homo economicus'', the economic man. If one actually believes in such a formulation of human nature, how does one explain why people are willing to sacrifice their lives for the national interest? Can one really say that the valiant soldiers who won medals for their valor were really just acting in their self-interests when they were repeatedly putting their lives in extreme danger for the sake of their comrades-in-arms? Or did these individuals sacrifice their own self-interest for the sake of their comrades?
Adam Smith, in his most famous work, ''The Wealth of Nations'', assumes that man is an egotistic individual who acts in his own economic self-interest. Therefore, the individual comes before the nation, with the nation being only a collection of individuals, therefore what is good for the individual must be good for the nation. To Adam Smith, since the individual is motivated by economic self-interest and the pursuit of cheaper goods, therefore logically the entire nation, being merely a collection of individuals, is better off if it leaves the production of goods to other nations as long as other nations can produce them at less cost.


The second that must be addressed is that of the practicality of universal free trade. For free trade to be applied universally, there is a presupposition that there is a universal union of all nations. If political enemies exist, free trade cannot take place, because political enemies will choose to not comply with your universally favorable free trade and will find every way to interrupt it simply because of their nature as political enemies. Can free trade ideologues really confidently say that there are no political enemies at this present time?
Given that man is assumed to be motivated by economic self-interest and the nation is but the collective of individuals that reside in it, therefore it stands to reason that under this logic, the economic must come before the political.


== The Logic of Autarky and Economic Nationalism ==
== The Logic of the Economic Nationalist ==
An economic nationalist would not be able to comprehend the aforementioned logic of capitalism, because to the nationalist, a nation is not a mere collection of individuals, nor does the individual exist before the nation. Nor does a nationalist believe that man is driven by his economic self-interest.
An economic nationalist does not believe that a nation is not a mere collection of individuals, nor does the individual exist before the nation. Nor does a nationalist believe that man is driven by his economic self-interest.


A nation, to the nationalist, is something that is distinct from and greater than the sum of all individuals that live within the boundaries of the nation. Therefore, individual/private interests are also something that is distinct from national interests, therefore what benefits the individual may not necessarily benefit the nation, therefore cheaper goods for the individual consumers within the nation may not necessarily be beneficial to the nation.
A nation, to the nationalist, is something that is distinct from and greater than the sum of all individuals that live within the boundaries of the nation. Therefore, individual/private interests are also something that is distinct from national interests, therefore what benefits the individual may not necessarily benefit the nation, therefore cheaper goods for the individual consumers within the nation may not necessarily be beneficial to the nation.
Clearly, the economic nationalist operates on a logic that is completely different to that of Adam Smith and free trade adherents, which helps to explain the existence of the deep misconceptions about autarky.


=== The Human Body Analogy ===
=== The Human Body Analogy ===
To better understand this point of view, the analogy of the human body will be used. Take the human body as analogous to the nation. Is the human body just the sum of all of its organs? No. To say the human body is merely the sum of its organs is to ignore how the organs interact with each other, how each organ serves a specific role in the maintenance and survival of the greater human body, how the organs overall are arranged and organized to achieve the greater interest that is that of the greater human body, how each individual organ is dependent on other organs and therefore the greater human body for its own survival.
To better understand the nationalist view of the nature of the nation, the analogy of the human body will be used.
 
=== It's Not Just About Cheaper Product ===
While it is true that autarky can cost a nation in the present more, what liberal capitalists fail to understand is that national interests are not just the interests of its individual members that exist in the present. National interests also consist of the interests of the ''future'' members of the nation. In addition, as Friedrich List has already pointed out in ''The National System of Political Economy'', there is a big difference between merely possessing wealth and possessing the power to generate wealth.


Liberal capitalists who are quick to point out current expenses of autarky and bewail the loss in efficiency fail to also point out that in order to be able to pay for imported goods, a nation must actually be able to generate the wealth required to pay for said imported goods. If a nation exports all of its industry overseas because other nations can manufacture its goods for cheaper, how then is this hypothetical nation supposed to obtain the wealth needed to actually be able to engage in trade? Free trade apologists seem to forget the fact that trade is not a one way street; trade requires you to give something up in exchange for something.
Take the human body as analogous to the nation. It can be argued that the human body is not just the sum of all of its organs. This is because the way in which the organs are arranged and organized, the way each organ depends on the others and vice versa, the way each organ serves a specialized role that is in turn for the purpose of the whole human body's interest.


Autarky, with its focus on the development of the productive power of the nation, therefore ensures that a nation will always have the means to not only provide for its citizens, but for the wealth needed when the nation is engaging in trade with other nations. The purpose of autarky is not for cheaper product, but as a means of survival for the nation.
=== The Nature of Nationalist Concerns ===
It is a mistake to understand autarky and nationalist concerns from an economic point of view. To fully understand autarky, it must be considered from a political point of view.


=== The Importance of the Political ===
Given that autarky usually entails high initial costs and costlier production, the purpose of autarky cannot be fully economic in nature; there are other concerns. The economic, from the nationalist point of view, is not an end in itself, but a means to certain political ends. Therefore, to the nationalist, the economic is always subservient to the political; the political must come before the economic and not the other way around, as outlined in this section of this article.
Another problem with the free trade ideology is the existence of politics and particular nations, which have their own particular interests and therefore can also be your political enemy.


Politics and nations are not things that can simply be ignored and dismissed as a mere sign of barbarism, as liberals and other free trade apologists would have you believe. The reality is that the political must come before the economic, and not the other way around, contrary to what liberal capitalists believe, with all their talk about how the government should not interfere with the economy and all. One does not simply make the political and the concept of political enemies go away because he does not like politics and writes books that pretend that the political does not exist in his analysis, metaphorically sticking his head in the sand.
=== The Purpose and Advantages of Autarky ===
By understanding the nature of nationalist concerns, the purpose of autarky is easier to understand. The political requirements of the nation thus come first. The other thing that is to be understood about autarky is that to its advocates, the ability to generate wealth is more important than possession of wealth.


If we are to accept Carl Schmitt's formulation of the essence of the political as the friend-enemy distinction, then the political will only vanish if political enemies no longer exist. Therefore, the free trade ideology, if applied universally (which is what free trade apologists do), can only be valid if all nations are friends with each other. Even if you do not completely buy Carl Schmitt's formulation of the essence of politics, what is undeniable is that free trade between two nations can only exist if these two nations are at least at peace with each other and are in a union of sorts.
Autarky, by enabling self-sufficiency, allows a nation to better survive conflicts with its potential political enemies. It also allows a nation to have a greater range of options because an autarkic nation is not dependent on its political enemies. Autarky, in fewer words, is a strong guarantor for true national sovereignty and allows a nation to decide which political entities threaten its interests the most and thus act accordingly. When these advantages of autarky are considered, coupled with the understanding that nationalists seek certain political goals that put the nation first, autarky, contrary to common misconception, is completely rational.


How else then is free trade practical and stable in any way? It is impossible for countries at war to engage in free trade with one another for all sorts of security reasons for one, as well as the fact that they are political enemies and therefore the assumption that the different nations should work with each other for their mutual benefit is invalid.
Also, because autarky insulates the essential production of a nation from political conflicts, autarky thus ensures the stability of the economic well-being of the nation’s citizens, for essential products are produced within the political union called the nation, where political conflict cannot exist and therefore cannot disrupt essential economic production. It is true that there are potential economic inefficiencies, however it must be emphasized again that the goals of autarky are not entirely economic in nature, and the economic to a nationalist is a means to an end rather than an end in itself. Here, the stability of the well-being of the nation’s citizens are prioritized over individual cost of purchase.


Therefore, autarky, whose object is to build up domestic industry, is completely practical from a political point of view. Autarky allows a nation to not be unnecessarily exposed to the intrigues of other nations, which can very well be the political enemies of our hypothetical nation. Autarky thus allows a nation more freedom in its actions and is a strong guarantor for national sovereignty because said nation is not dependent on other political entities for its own sustenance.
Finally, in order to pay for imported goods, a nation needs to generate the wealth required to pay for said imported goods. If a nation exports all of its industry overseas because other nations can manufacture its goods for cheaper, a nation would henceforth not be able to produce enough wealth for exchange in trade, bearing in mind that trade involves a party giving something up in exchange for another, otherwise there can be no trade. Therefore, autarky, with its focus on the development of the productive power of the nation, ensures that a nation will always have the wealth needed when the nation is engaging in trade with other nations.


== Conclusion ==
== Conclusion ==
It should be clear by now that autarky, contrary to what some might believe, is not insane or impractical. On the contrary, autarky is completely practical from the national and political point of view, more so than universal free trade since unlike universal free trade, autarky accounts for the very real fact that particular nations exist and therefore a nation must engage with political entities that can be its enemies, very much unlike the liberal worldview who cannot resist talking about the "universal brotherhood of man", "universal rights of man", et cetera.
Autarky, contrary to somewhat common misconception, is not particularly irrational. Many misconceptions about autarky stem from the differences in priorities and worldview between its adherents and its critics. It is only irrational if autarky is considered from a purely economic point of view in a specific time frame. However, autarky, when considered from a political and nationalist point of view, is entirely rational.

Revision as of 10:35, 15 April 2022

Autarky: An Introduction

Autarky, quite simply, means self-sufficiency, usually through extensive development of home industry.

Due to the dominance of what is referred to as the "free trade ideology" or "liberal capitalism" that sees its roots in Adam Smith, the author of the well-known The Wealth of Nations, the term autarky has sometimes held a negative connotation, as though nations that pursue autarky are not acting rationally.

Commonly held misconceptions about autarky usually center around arguing how it is more expensive for a nation to manufacture a significant portion of its required goods domestically and is therefore irrational. There are also some arguments that go further and say that autarky thus is the government creating artificial monopolies through government intervention for the benefit of certain private corporations.

Much of this stems from various assumptions held by orthodox economists as well as a misunderstanding of the priorities and viewpoints of those who pursue autarkic policies, who are mostly economic nationalists. This article is written to address such misunderstandings and to explain the logic and purpose of autarky.

The Logic of Adam Smith

Adam Smith, in his most famous work, The Wealth of Nations, assumes that man is an egotistic individual who acts in his own economic self-interest. Therefore, the individual comes before the nation, with the nation being only a collection of individuals, therefore what is good for the individual must be good for the nation. To Adam Smith, since the individual is motivated by economic self-interest and the pursuit of cheaper goods, therefore logically the entire nation, being merely a collection of individuals, is better off if it leaves the production of goods to other nations as long as other nations can produce them at less cost.

Given that man is assumed to be motivated by economic self-interest and the nation is but the collective of individuals that reside in it, therefore it stands to reason that under this logic, the economic must come before the political.

The Logic of the Economic Nationalist

An economic nationalist does not believe that a nation is not a mere collection of individuals, nor does the individual exist before the nation. Nor does a nationalist believe that man is driven by his economic self-interest.

A nation, to the nationalist, is something that is distinct from and greater than the sum of all individuals that live within the boundaries of the nation. Therefore, individual/private interests are also something that is distinct from national interests, therefore what benefits the individual may not necessarily benefit the nation, therefore cheaper goods for the individual consumers within the nation may not necessarily be beneficial to the nation.

Clearly, the economic nationalist operates on a logic that is completely different to that of Adam Smith and free trade adherents, which helps to explain the existence of the deep misconceptions about autarky.

The Human Body Analogy

To better understand the nationalist view of the nature of the nation, the analogy of the human body will be used.

Take the human body as analogous to the nation. It can be argued that the human body is not just the sum of all of its organs. This is because the way in which the organs are arranged and organized, the way each organ depends on the others and vice versa, the way each organ serves a specialized role that is in turn for the purpose of the whole human body's interest.

The Nature of Nationalist Concerns

It is a mistake to understand autarky and nationalist concerns from an economic point of view. To fully understand autarky, it must be considered from a political point of view.

Given that autarky usually entails high initial costs and costlier production, the purpose of autarky cannot be fully economic in nature; there are other concerns. The economic, from the nationalist point of view, is not an end in itself, but a means to certain political ends. Therefore, to the nationalist, the economic is always subservient to the political; the political must come before the economic and not the other way around, as outlined in this section of this article.

The Purpose and Advantages of Autarky

By understanding the nature of nationalist concerns, the purpose of autarky is easier to understand. The political requirements of the nation thus come first. The other thing that is to be understood about autarky is that to its advocates, the ability to generate wealth is more important than possession of wealth.

Autarky, by enabling self-sufficiency, allows a nation to better survive conflicts with its potential political enemies. It also allows a nation to have a greater range of options because an autarkic nation is not dependent on its political enemies. Autarky, in fewer words, is a strong guarantor for true national sovereignty and allows a nation to decide which political entities threaten its interests the most and thus act accordingly. When these advantages of autarky are considered, coupled with the understanding that nationalists seek certain political goals that put the nation first, autarky, contrary to common misconception, is completely rational.

Also, because autarky insulates the essential production of a nation from political conflicts, autarky thus ensures the stability of the economic well-being of the nation’s citizens, for essential products are produced within the political union called the nation, where political conflict cannot exist and therefore cannot disrupt essential economic production. It is true that there are potential economic inefficiencies, however it must be emphasized again that the goals of autarky are not entirely economic in nature, and the economic to a nationalist is a means to an end rather than an end in itself. Here, the stability of the well-being of the nation’s citizens are prioritized over individual cost of purchase.

Finally, in order to pay for imported goods, a nation needs to generate the wealth required to pay for said imported goods. If a nation exports all of its industry overseas because other nations can manufacture its goods for cheaper, a nation would henceforth not be able to produce enough wealth for exchange in trade, bearing in mind that trade involves a party giving something up in exchange for another, otherwise there can be no trade. Therefore, autarky, with its focus on the development of the productive power of the nation, ensures that a nation will always have the wealth needed when the nation is engaging in trade with other nations.

Conclusion

Autarky, contrary to somewhat common misconception, is not particularly irrational. Many misconceptions about autarky stem from the differences in priorities and worldview between its adherents and its critics. It is only irrational if autarky is considered from a purely economic point of view in a specific time frame. However, autarky, when considered from a political and nationalist point of view, is entirely rational.