updated collection

docs/collection/hertecon.html

@@ -32,14 +32,15 @@
             </div>
          </a>
       </nav>
-      <p>THE HERITAGE OF ECONOMIC LIBERTY</p>
-      <p>By RICHARD M. EBELING</p>
-      <p>For the Founding Fathers, economic liberty was inseparable
+      <div id="conspiracy">
+         <p>THE HERITAGE OF ECONOMIC LIBERTY</p>
+         <p>By RICHARD M. EBELING</p>
+         <p>For the Founding Fathers, economic liberty was inseparable
 from the case for political freedom. Many of the grievances
 enumerated in the Declaration of Independence concern <span class="NORP" title="NORP">British</span>
 infringements on the free movement of goods and men between
 the thirteen colonies and the rest of the world.</p>
-      <p>It was not a coincidence that the same year that saw the
+         <p>It was not a coincidence that the same year that saw the
 Declaration of Independence also saw the publication of Adam
 Smith's Wealth of Nations. Both represented the ideas of the
 age. When Smith spoke of a "system of natural liberty" in
@@ -49,14 +50,14 @@ his own way and to bring both his industry and capital into
 competition with those of other men," he was expressing the
 economic vision of most of those who fought for freedom from
 British imperialism in the thirteen colonies.</p>
-      <p>Following independence, the thirteen independent states were
+         <p>Following independence, the thirteen independent states were
 loosely bound together by the Articles of Confederation. Many
 of the Founding Fathers, however, raised concerns about
 economic policies which the sovereign states were
 implementing. They had introduced various forms of economic
 nationalism into their relationships with not only European
 countries, but also among themselves.</p>
-      <p>They imposed tariffs against the goods of other states. They
+         <p>They imposed tariffs against the goods of other states. They
 gave monopoly trading privileges to their respective citizens
 in various lines of manufacturing and commerce. They passed
 legal tender laws excluding or hampering the free choice in
@@ -66,12 +67,12 @@ shackles of <span class="NORP" title="NORP">British</span> mercantilism when the
 independence in 1776, by the late 1780s the sovereign states
 were all practicing that against which they had fought in the
 war for independence.</p>
-      <p>To overcome these economic barriers, the writers of the
+         <p>To overcome these economic barriers, the writers of the
 Constitution (that replaced the Articles of Confederation in
 1787) included in Article 1, Section 8 that, "the Congress
 shall have the Power . . . To regulate Commerce with foreign
 Nations, and among the several States . . ."</p>
-      <p>For many, the meaning of "to regulate" in the Constitution was
+         <p>For many, the meaning of "to regulate" in the Constitution was
 meant to prohibit economic nationalism and make the several
 states a single, unified free trade area. Most of the Founding
 Fathers were very familiar with the free trade ideas of
@@ -81,7 +82,7 @@ were correct when they advocated the free movement of goods,
 men, and ideas from one part of the globe to another. Freedom
 and prosperity were to be linked together in one system of
 human liberty.</p>
-      <p>The philosophy of wide economic freedom was believed in and
+         <p>The philosophy of wide economic freedom was believed in and
 advocated during most of the 19th century. Said Daniel
 Webster, for example, in 1814: "It is the true policy of
 government to suffer the different pursuits of society to take
@@ -91,7 +92,7 @@ spirit of the Constitution. It has not, in my opinion,
 conferred on the government the power of changing the
 occupation of the people of different states and sections and
 of forcing them into other employments."</p>
-      <p>The same view was still respectable and defended toward the
+         <p>The same view was still respectable and defended toward the
 end of the nineteenth century. President Grover Cleveland, in
 his 1893 inaugural address, "condemned the injustice of
 maintaining protection . . . . It perverts the patriotic
@@ -101,7 +102,7 @@ government maintenance. It undermines the self-reliance of our
 people, and substitutes in its place dependence upon
 governmental favoritism." It created, President Cleveland
 said, the spirit of governmental "paternalism."</p>
-      <p>While the United States government never completely removed
+         <p>While the United States government never completely removed
 itself from the economic affairs of the people, broad economic
 freedom was more the rule than the exception in the last
 century. Why? To quote Daniel Webster once more, "The general
@@ -109,24 +110,24 @@ sense of this age sets with a strong current in favor of
 freedom of commercial intercourse and unrestrained action."
 Economic liberty, Webster argued, was "the general tide of
 opinion."</p>
-      <p>In our time, the general tide of opinion in the United States
+         <p>In our time, the general tide of opinion in the United States
 has not been kind to either freedom of commercial intercourse
 or unrestrained individual action. The reverse has been the
 case. Listen to two voices from the contemporary business
 community.</p>
-      <p>Lee Iacocca believes that, "the 1980s were a time of quick
+         <p>Lee Iacocca believes that, "the 1980s were a time of quick
 bucks, greed, and a lot of corruption . . . . [W]e've got to
 work and pull this country up by its bootstrap." And Mr.
 Iacocca sees an important role for government in guiding us
 away from our "lustful and greedy" ways.</p>
-      <p>Steve Jobs, founder of Apple Computer, argues that, "getting
+         <p>Steve Jobs, founder of Apple Computer, argues that, "getting
 rid of General Noriega is important, but I wish the computer
 industry would get a tenth of the space on our national agenda
 that he has. We have to make these issues national
 priorities." Technological achievements are still possible for
 America, he believes, through "government leadership." The
 problem is that "the private sector [is] dancing to its short-run tune," while government leadership can offer us the long-term vision for intelligent decision-making.</p>
-      <p>Many economists no longer share Adam Smith's vision. Lester
+         <p>Many economists no longer share Adam Smith's vision. Lester
 Thurow, dean of the Sloan School of Management at MIT, says
 that the <span class="NORP" title="NORP">Japanese</span> "pick out an industry to conquer" and unless
 we (read: the government) do something to stop their invasion
@@ -139,14 +140,14 @@ In the next ten years, we will do the same . . . . We ought to
 move toward a uniform national system of child support with
 payments deducted automatically by the government from the
 employer."</p>
-      <p>For one hundred years, Adam Smith's economic system of natural
+         <p>For one hundred years, Adam Smith's economic system of natural
 liberty has been under attack. The idea that men, left to
 their own decisions, can make better choices for themselves
 than a paternalistic government, and that free men interacting
 with each other through voluntary exchange can produce more
 wealth and prosperity than any form of government planning or
 intervention, has been denied and often ridiculed.</p>
-      <p>At the same time, the Marxist view of society has permeated
+         <p>At the same time, the Marxist view of society has permeated
 the conscience of the world, including America. Great wealth
 and financial success bear the stigma of unscrupulous behavior
 and deceitful conduct. How could a person or company have
@@ -154,7 +155,7 @@ accumulated so much wealth and influence in a market unless
 they have been dishonest and exploitive? Besides, why does
 anyone need so much while so many in the society still have so
 little?</p>
-      <p>The only solution to government regulation and redistribution
+         <p>The only solution to government regulation and redistribution
 of wealth in 20th century America is an amendment to the
 Constitution that recognizes and guarantees a separation of
 the economy and the State. Only the establishment of economic
@@ -162,7 +163,7 @@ freedom on a par with freedom of speech, religion and the
 press can assure that there will be fewer ambiguities
 concerning the rights of the people and their economic
 affairs.</p>
-      <p>But such a constitutional reform will not be possible until
+         <p>But such a constitutional reform will not be possible until
 there occurs a change in "the general tide of opinion." Not
 until people fully realize that the cherished freedoms under
 the Constitution are truly protected only with inviolatable
@@ -177,14 +178,14 @@ via the use of an elected middle man--will we be able to
 remove the power of Congress to regulate and intrude into
 peaceful and mutually-beneficial economic activities of the
 American people.</p>
-      <p>This Fourth of July, as we wave the flag and watch the rockets
+         <p>This Fourth of July, as we wave the flag and watch the rockets
 red glare, let us also, as the Founding Fathers, "mutually
 pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred
 Honor" to awaken in ourselves, and all those with whom we
 interact, a renewed faith in free men and an understanding of
 the peace and prosperity that can only come from unhampered
 free markets and free trade.</p>
-      <p>Professor Ebeling is the Ludwig von Mises Professor of
+         <p>Professor Ebeling is the Ludwig von Mises Professor of
 Economics at Hillsdale College in Michigan and also serves as
 Vice-President of Academic Affairs of The Future of Freedom
 Foundation, P.O. Box 9752, Denver, CO 80209.
@@ -196,5 +197,6 @@ PO Box 9752, Denver, Colorado 80209, 303-777-3588.
 Permission granted to reprint; please give appropriate credit
 and send one copy of reprinted material to the Foundation.
 </p>
+      </div>
    </body>
 </html>