A spectre is haunting Earth — the spectre of freedom. All the powers of the existing order have entered into a holy alliance to exorcise this spectre: Pope and Drug Czar, Tillerson and May, European progressives and Chinese financial police.

Where is the party in opposition that has not been decried as anarchistic by its opponents in power? Where is the opposition that has not hurled back the branding reproach of anarchism, against the more advanced opposition parties, as well as against its reactionary adversaries?

Yes, I’ve swiped those first two paragraphs from Karl Marx’s Communist Manifesto and reformulated them for our day. Whatever Marx’s faults as an economic, social and political theorist (and they were many), he was on to something when he took notice of the convulsions wrought by the Industrial Revolution.

One side effect of that revolution — which raised the standard of living in what we now call the “developed” nations so much that the monarchs of the 19th century look like paupers compared to the average middle class American of today — was centralization. Production moved from home workshops into factories. The fragmented political and economic power of small feudal fiefdoms was consolidated into the hands of national political classes and central planners.

Three quarters of a century into the Information Revolution, its ramifications are finally becoming clear. We’re decentralizing.

With the press of a button, a writer can make her work available to a global audience without the large centralized publishing company she’d have had to beg for help  even 25 years ago.

Taxi monopolies find themselves in mortal combat with apps which connect individual riders to individual drivers; hotel monopolies with apps which connect lodgers to spare rooms in homes.

The political class and its cronies have effectively lost the war to save the centralized “intellectual property” monopolies, and are now losing their grip on money as cryptocurrencies begin to limit their ability to regulate and tax commerce.

This revolution is far from finished, but it is in principle already possible for a retail clerk in Wichita to talk, share, and trade with a chef in Smolensk or a mechanic in Singapore — without the permission of Donald Trump, Vladimir Putin, or Lee Hsien Loong.

When Theresa May calls for Internet censorship to “stop terrorism” or Charles Schumer tries to suppress Bitcoin “to protect the consumer,” the above is what they are actually fighting desperately to reverse.

They know they’re losing their power over you. They want it back. But their only weapon is their ability to convince you that you need them. You don’t.

Government as we know it is disappearing, and that’s a good thing. What’s next? Who knows? I look forward to finding out.

Thomas L. Knapp (Twitter: @thomaslknapp) is director and senior news analyst at the William Lloyd Garrison Center for Libertarian Advocacy Journalism (thegarrisoncenter.org). He lives and works in north central Florida.

PUBLICATION  HISTORY

• “Mere Anarchy: The Center Cannot Hold,” by Thomas L. Knapp, OpEdNews, 06/20/17
• “Mere Anarchy: The Center Cannot Hold,” by Thomas L. Knapp, Key West: The Newspaper [Florida], 06/23/17
• “Mere anarchy — the center cannot hold,” by Thomas L. Knapp, Newberry, South Carolina Observer, 06/26/17
• “Mere Anarchy: The Center Cannot Hold,” by Thomas L. Knapp, Florence, Alabama Courier Journal, 06/27/17
• “Mere anarchy: The center cannot hold,” by Thomas L. Knapp, Sevierville, Tennessee Mountain Press, 06/27/17

Writing in Reason magazine, Ronald Bailey asks (and tries to answer) a question you’ve probably been hearing a lot lately and may have silently asked yourself:  “Are Robots Going to Steal Our Jobs?” Bailey takes an optimistic view. “[A]s we look ahead now to the end of the 21st century, we can’t predict what jobs workers will be doing, he writes. “But that’s no reason to assume those jobs won’t exist.”

Bailey has history on his side. On the other hand, the question is certainly worth taking seriously.

Technological advances have historically ended up creating more jobs than they eliminate and increasing the aggregate wealth and power of the societies which adopt them. Oral Messengers and Backpack Wheat Carriers Union, Sumer Local #1, probably lobbied against the adoption of writing and the wheel, but it’s hard to envision a path from Sumer to modern civilization that doesn’t include them. And by comparison to the kings of Sumer, the lowest quintile of any developed society today live like, well, kings. Technological advancement makes more things available to more people more cheaply.  Technological stagnation produces social stagnation a la the Dark Ages.

Will the current era of automation culminate in the opposite of historical results — mass unemployment, a dramatic increase in the wealth and power gap separating rich and poor?

Or are we at the doorway to a “post-scarcity” era, a product of what Ray Kurzweil calls the Law of Accelerating Returns,  in which work as we know it becomes highly optional because the necessities and minor luxuries of life get so cheap that we’re free spend the bulk of our time doing whatever we please instead of scrabbling for food, shelter, clothing, and cable television?

The answer may not be quite so binary. Maybe things will just keep slowly getting better, or maybe they’ll start slowly getting worse.

But my guess is that if we can successfully shed the burden of our most regressive and wealth-draining social institution — political government, aka the state — before it drags us down into global totalitarian slavery or  nuclear suicide, the future will look a lot more like the latter than like the former.

In the US, government leeches more than third of GDP directly out of the productive sector and into its political schemes, and kills still more of the productive sector’s potential with regulation.

The democratization of technology (these days you can make things in your garage or on your desktop that could only be made in a large factory 50 years ago) and the rise of economic networks that can at least potentially function beyond the reach of state taxation and regulation represent an opportunity to take back the future. Let’s seize that opportunity.

Thomas L. Knapp (Twitter: @thomaslknapp) is director and senior news analyst at the William Lloyd Garrison Center for Libertarian Advocacy Journalism (thegarrisoncenter.org). He lives and works in north central Florida.

PUBLICATION  HISTORY

• “Contemplating a jobless future: I for one welcome our new robot overlords,” by Thomas L. Knapp, Winchester, Tennessee Herald Chronicle, 06/16/17
• “Contemplating a Jobless Society: I For One Welcome Our New Robot Overlords,” by Thomas L. Knapp, OpEdNews, 06/16/17
• “I welcome our new robot overlords,” by Thomas L. Knapp, New Haven, Connecticut Register, 06/19/17
• “I welcome our new robot overlords,” by Thomas L. Knapp, Northwest Connecticut Register Citizen, 06/19/17
• “A jobless future? I welcome our new robot overlords,” by Thomas L. Knapp, Middletown, Connecticut Press [web and print editions], 06/19-20/17
• “Contemplating a jobless future: I for one welcome our new robot overlords,” by Thomas L. Knapp, Kinston, North Carolina Free Press, 06/20/17
• “Contemplating a jobless future, welcoming our new robot overlords,” by Thomas L. Knapp, Pahrump Valley, Nevada Times, 06/21/17
• “Contemplating a Jobless Future: I For One Welcome Our New Robot Overlords,” by Thomas L. Knapp, Ventura County, California Citizens Journal, 06/22/17
• “Contemplating a Jobless Future: I For One Welcome Our New Robot Overlords,” by Thomas L. Knapp, Key West: The Newspaper [Florida], 06/23/17
• “Contemplating a Jobless Future,” by Thomas L. Knapp, Queens, New York Leader/Observer [web and print editions], 07/04/17
• “Contemplating a Jobless Future,” by Thomas L. Knapp, Queens, New York Ledger [web and print editions], 07/04/17
• “Contemplating a Jobless Future,” by Thomas L. Knapp, Long Island City/Astoria, New York Journal [web and print editions], 07/04/17
• “Contemplating a Jobless Future,” by Thomas L. Knapp, Forest Hill/Rego Park, New York Times [web and print editions], 07/04/17
• “Contemplating a Jobless Future,” by Thomas L. Knapp, Glendale, New York Register [web and print editions], 07/04/17
• “Contemplating a Jobless Future,” by Thomas L. Knapp, Queens, New York Examiner [web and print editions], 07/04/17
• “Contemplating a Jobless Future,” by Thomas L. Knapp, Greenpoint, New York Star [web and print editions], 07/04/17
• “Contemplating a Jobless Future,” by Thomas L. Knapp, Brookly, New York Downtown Star [web and print editions], 07/04/17

The Budget and Accounting Act of 1921 requires the president of the United States to submit a budget proposal to Congress for each fiscal year. Congress isn’t required to honor that proposal. In fact its budget resolutions and actual appropriations seldom reflect presidents’ requests very closely. But there are always fireworks over the request anyway.

President Donald Trump’s proposed budget for FY2018 calls for a 13% ($9 billion) cut to the US Department of Education versus 2017’s discretionary funding.

That may sound like a big big hit to your kids’ schools, and the usual suspects would like you to think it constitutes a gutting of “public” (read: government) education in America, but there are a few things to keep in mind when thinking about it.

First of all, according to the National Center for Education Statistics, total government spending (at all levels) on elementary and secondary education in the US came to $634 billion for the 2013-2014 academic year. Additionally, Americans spent $517 billion on postsecondary education, the bulk of it through government, that year.

Keeping in mind that those numbers have likely gone up, not down, in the intervening years, and that state and local spending will probably continue to increase, a 13% cut to the US Department of Education would in reality be at most a reduction of only eight tenths of one percent in total US education spending. Calling that a tempest in a teapot demeans tempests and teapots. This disturbance is more like dropping a grain of salt in a shot glass.

Secondly, there’s a good case to be made that federal education spending cancels out any positive effects of state and local spending rather than boosting them. As former New Mexico governor  and Libertarian presidential candidate Gary Johnson notes, “[t]he Department of Education grants each state 11 cents out of every dollar it spends on education. Unfortunately, every dollar of this money comes with 16 cents of strings attached. States that accept federal funding lose five cents for every dollar spent on education to pay for federal mandates and regulations, taking millions of dollars out of the classroom.” And don’t forget that that 11 cents started out as a 13 cent deduction from your paycheck.

Finally, although the federal government spends more than twice as much per student on education today as it did when the department was created in 1980, student performance remains, at best, stagnant.

After nearly 40 years, it’s reasonable to conclude that the US Department of Education is a failed experiment. Its budget should be cut by 100% — turn out the lights, send the bureaucrats home, sell the buildings and equipment — not by a mere 13%.

But we know that’s not going to happen, don’t we? This isn’t about education. It’s about politics. It’s not about teaching kids to read and write and calculate. It’s about buying votes from special interests with taxpayer dollars . I predict that the department’s FY2018 budget will be larger, not smaller, than its FY2017 budget.

If we want decent educations for our children, the solution is complete  separation of school and state.

Thomas L. Knapp (Twitter: @thomaslknapp) is director and senior news analyst at the William Lloyd Garrison Center for Libertarian Advocacy Journalism (thegarrisoncenter.org). He lives and works in north central Florida.

PUBLICATION  HISTORY

• “Federal Education Budget: Teapot, Meet Tempest,” by Thomas L. Knapp, OpEdNews, 06/14/17
• “The Federal Education Budget: Teapot, Meet Tempest,” by Thomas L. Knapp, Ventura County, California Citizens Journal, 06/14/17
• “The federal education budget: Teapot, meet tempest,” by Thomas L. Knapp, Winchester, Tennessee Herald Chronicle, 06/14/17
• “The federal education budget: Teapot, meet tempest,” by Thomas L. Knapp, Fayette, West Virginia Tribune, 06/15/17
• “Education budget: Teapot, meet tempest,” by Thomas L. Knapp, Newberry, South Carolina Observer, 06/21/17
• “Education budget: Teapot, meet tempest,” by Thomas L. Knapp, Pickens, South Carolina Sentinel, 06/21/17