Investigating The Beginnings Of Big
Government
In my quest to find the origins
of why big government in Western countries has become ever so expansive and
pervasive I came to the realization you have to go way back in history.
Neither Democracy Nor The Rule Of Law
Prevent Or Even Limit Big Government
Anyone who seriously believes
that is delusional and ignorant of the facts and history.
The Acts
In 1834, 1840, 1867 and 1875 Britain
passed three successive Acts to prohibit boys from working as chimney sweepers.
The motivation for these Acts was noble: “Many climbing boys were illegitimate
who had been sold by their parents. They suffered from scorched and lacerated
skin, their eyes and throats filled with soot, with the danger of suffocation
and their occupational disease—cancer of the scrotum.” (
Source).
However, to enforce these Acts
annual licensing was required and the enforcement by police as well as government
inspections. Thus, these Acts, as so many others ever since, became more and
more intrusive and interventionist to achieve their goal.
One should take note that a
particular industry was singled out here, one that probably did not have a good
reputation or high esteem in society.
Alternatives
The proponents of these Acts
saw it necessary to use the full coercive power of the state to enforce uniform
public policy across entire industries. Was this really necessary or the only
solution available at the time?
Why were chimneys not built in
such a way that adults could clean them?
Why did government not promote
research into better, e.g. more mechanical methods of cleaning chimneys?
Why were not those prosecuted
who had their chimneys cleaned by child chimney sweepers?
Why was the law not limited to
criminalize those businesses who hired boy sweepers or who endangered them
recklessly?
Were these alternatives not
practical or feasible? Why?
When these boys were sold by
their parents to a master sweep, why did the government or charities etc. not
buy them?
There is more to the story
behind these children (see e.g.
Wikipedia).
Anthony Ashley-Cooper, 7th Earl of
Shaftesbury
He was “one of the most
effective social and industrial reformers in 19th-century England” (Encyclopedia
Britannica). When the Acts were not enforced effectively beyond London, “this
led to the foundation of the Climbing-Boys' Society with
Ashley as its
chairman.” I could not immediately find more information on this Society, but I
wonder whether it could not have heightened awareness of this and ameliorate
this issue without the coercive powers of government.
We also read: “After
Shaftesbury discovered that a boy chimney sweep was living behind his house in
Brock Street, London, he rescued the child and sent him to "the Union
School at Norwood Hill, where, under God's blessing and special merciful grace,
he will be trained in the knowledge and love and faith of our common Saviour".”
(
Source).
Why did he do this not more
often? Why did not other likeminded people do it more frequently?
Further, “In February 1875 a
twelve-year-old boy … was sent up … Hospital chimneys by his master …. He stuck
and smothered. The entire wall had to be pulled down to get him out and
although he was still alive, he died shortly afterwards. There was a Coroner’s
Inquest which returned a verdict of manslaughter. [The master] was sentenced to
six months’ imprisonment with hard labour. Lord Shaftesbury seized on the
incident to press his campaign again. He wrote a series of letters to The Times
and in September 1875 pushed another Bill through Parliament which finally
stopped the practice of sending boys up chimneys.” (
Source).
Why did he not seize on this
incident to press for harsher punishment of such employers?
Far Reaching Consequences – The Spiral Of
Interventions
Child labor protection by
itself was certainly a sensible and overdue social reform. The means chosen are
debatable. However, at about the same time also adult women were protected
whether they wanted it or not. Soon after work days were uniformly limited to
first 10 hours and later less for all workers and businesses. Since these
reforms were widely accepted so it is being claimed and since their opponents
were defeated, more and more labor protection laws were enacted in the course
of history. This progressed to our days with labor laws in e.g. Germany, Italy,
or France of such a kind that firing or changing working conditions is very
difficult or nearly impossible. Government working conditions are even more
generous.
Even worse, individual freedom
and responsibility were severely subverted; property rights of business owners were
trampled; and freedom of contract was violated. Such damage that ill conceived
social reforms have done to our societies is very difficult to undo. The status
quo has become enshrined without second thought.
Mary Poppins Movie
This movie actually features
chimney sweepers on London roofs in an almost glorifying way. Just watch this
subversive, highly anti Capitalist movie again.
The film “… has an extended
dance sequence in which the jovial workers celebrate the end of the workday
with fearless acrobatics. Their leader, "Bert", played by Dick van
Dyke, sings "Chim Chim Cher-ee" which won the Oscar for "Best
Song" in 1965.” (
Source).
