William F Buckley once argued that a free society by necessity allows for an unequal society. Thus if we truly believe in freedom, we accept the natural inequality between the rich and the poor. Without the possibility of unevenness, he argues, we are really not free to choose and live as we so desire. Buckley’s idea of enhancing freedom is deregulating and shrinking the government. He believes we should not mitigate the extreme effects of income inequality by regulating human behavior and activity. To the contrary, more regulation on human behavior and activity can improve freedom by providing individuals with greater economic security and more personal choice.
Over the course of history, the more we have regulated human behavior in terms of taxation, licensing and other regulatory restrictions, the stronger we have become economically as a society. Ponder this. Would you feel comfortable with no restrictions on how much an individual is allowed to contribute to a political campaign? The absence of campaign finance laws would guarantee a rigged system in which the wealthy are able to dictate the rules of the game.
Corporate fat cats are tantamount to thieves who are picking the pockets of the working class in order their line their own. Their ideal society is one in which the billionaire class controls the nation’s wealth and plays by their own rules. Why has civilization evolved to believe in the role of law and government at all? The answer is simple: without government and laws, chaos would ensue. The cost of freedom is the willingness to surrender some control.