Re: Collectives II

Nobody asked but …

My Kentucky Wildcat basketball team lost in a close contest to Michigan State last night.  These are two of the teams considered most likely to play for the National Championship in the early Spring of 2014.  So a statist may have observed my tirade against collectives and responded with, “you are a fanboy of a team (collective) sport.  With 8 National Championships at the University of Kentucky, surely you see that great things can be accomplished by teams?”  To which I respond, “don’t call me Shirley!”  But here’s the real deal.  Basketball is played by teams because that is an imposed obstacle to increase the unpredictability of the game.  Would you pay $40 to watch one player, even LeBron James, shoot baskets?  Would you even sit still to watch LeBron James play every other NBA player one-on-one to find out who is best?  Games are played by teams because it adds complexity and degree of difficulty, and interest.  To be sure, a given team may be able to perform as a team better than any other team.  In fact, the season long champion may play an all-star team, and with sufficient incentive, make the all-stars look like chopped liver.  But my real point is that the specialization of skills on a basketball team is part of a centrally planned environment.  The specialization of production that arises, in self-organization, in a free market, is achieved by voluntaryist individuals — individuals are free to choose or invent specialties amid an unlimited set of opportunities.


Save as PDFPrint
Liked it? Support this contributor on Patreon!

Written by 

Notify of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments