2005/01/10 - Gabriel Calzada - Libertad Digital

Natural Disasters Part I: Do We Need the State to Help?

Faced with a catastrophe of biblical proportions, citizens of developed countries have sent every type of resource to help ease the region’s suffering. This terrible event is, however, also a good moment to reconsider some of the interventionist group-think about dealing with major disasters.

The tidal wave that devastated Indonesia, Sri Lanka, India, Thailand and a long list of other unlucky Asian and African countries is without doubt one of the greatest human tragedies ever. Close to 150.000 deaths, millions of people injured, 6.000 kilometres of damaged coastline and the destruction of innumerable capital goods – particularly in the fishing and tourist industries. These numbers barely capture the magnitude of the tsunami and its aftershocks. Faced with a catastrophe of biblical proportions, citizens of developed countries have sent every type of resource to help ease the region’s suffering. This terrible event is, however, also a good moment to reconsider some of the interventionist group-think about dealing with major disasters.

The first interventionist fantasy shattered by the waves is the supposed need of state institutions to confront this type of calamity. From the very beginning, aid from around the world has been getting to the most devastated areas without government supervision or coercive taxes. Through their authentic acts of goodwill, millions of individuals and private organizations refute the free rider theory. The theory predicts that in a world of voluntary relationships, that is, in the reviled free market, no one would bother to help the tsunami victims because they would wait for others to do it for them. The current outpouring of aid shows this is not the case. Both the free rider theory, a cornerstone in the public goods defence of state intervention, and the supposedly irreplaceable aid to the poor the state provides, and uses to justify its existence, is happily undone by the evidence.

Politicians, as usual, have drawn the exact wrong conclusion from these dramatic events: the world needs the European Union to snatch its citizen’s money to fund a rapid reaction force. Do they not see Europeans are sending money to pay people, NGOs and businesses to react rapidly?! Just because politicians were slow to respond cannot serve as an excuse to enlarge the state. It should serve as a reason to do the opposite and shrink it.

By this point in human history there can be little doubt about the superiority of private compared to public use of scarce resources to satisfy any type of human need. If we want to send an urgent letter or package, we use a private messenger service; if we are suffering from a serious illness and need to be operated on at once, we try to have it done in a private hospital; and if we want a quality education for our children, we make sure to save our earnings to pay for a private school. It is the same with natural disasters. Only through private companies, whose owners and employees live from doing their work efficiently, and missionaries, who dedicate themselves to helping their fellow man in desperate situations, can we ensure all those resources sent by millions of caring people, are used as effectively and competently as possible.

Some will ask if there is something European leaders can do. Yes, there is. European governments could honor the tsunami’s victims by giving back all the money they planned to waste on “rapid reaction units” to their citizens. This way, individual Europeans would have more resources to donate, allowing for greater, faster and more efficient aid to reach those who have lost their loved ones and witnessed the destruction of their most precious goods.