Autarky

Autarky: An Introduction

Autarky, quite simply, means self-sufficiency, usually through extensive development of home industry.

Due to the dominance of what will be called the "free trade ideology" or "liberal capitalism" that sees its roots in Adam Smith, the term autarky has sometimes held a negative connotation, as though nations that pursue autarky are somehow not acting rationally.

What free trade ideologues fail to realize however, is that those who pursue autarky are operating on a logic that is completely alien to the liberal capitalist, who is also a rootless cosmopolitan; the adherents of autarky are not capitalists, but economic nationalists.

The Logic of Liberal Capitalism

A liberal capitalist would believe that man is an egotistic individual who acts in his own economic self-interest. Therefore, the individual comes before the nation, with the nation being only a collection of individuals, therefore what is good for the individual must be good for the nation. To the liberal capitalist, since the individual is motivated by economic self-interest and the pursuit of cheaper goods, therefore logically the entire nation, being merely a collection of individuals, would be better off if they would just export their industry to those nations that can produce those same goods at a cheaper cost.

The Fallacious Assumptions and Impracticalities of Liberal Capitalism

The first that must be addressed is the conception of human nature as laid out by Adam Smith, that of Homo economicus, the economic man. If one actually believes in such a formulation of human nature, how does one explain why people are willing to sacrifice their lives for the national interest? Can one really say that the valiant soldiers who won medals for their valor were really just acting in their self-interests when they were repeatedly putting their lives in extreme danger for the sake of their comrades-in-arms? Or did these individuals sacrifice their own self-interest for the sake of their comrades?

The second that must be addressed is that of the practicality of universal free trade. For free trade to be applied universally, there is a presupposition that there is a universal union of all nations. If political enemies exist, free trade cannot take place, because political enemies will choose to not comply with your universally favorable free trade and will find every way to interrupt it simply because of their nature as political enemies. Can free trade ideologues really confidently say that there are no political enemies at this present time?

The Logic of Autarky and Economic Nationalism

An economic nationalist would not be able to comprehend the aforementioned logic of capitalism, because to the nationalist, a nation is not a mere collection of individuals, nor does the individual exist before the nation. Nor does a nationalist believe that man is driven by his economic self-interest.

A nation, to the nationalist, is something that is distinct from and greater than the sum of all individuals that live within the boundaries of the nation. Therefore, individual/private interests are also something that is distinct from national interests, therefore what benefits the individual may not necessarily benefit the nation, therefore cheaper goods for the individual consumers within the nation may not necessarily be beneficial to the nation.

The Human Body Analogy

To better understand this point of view, the analogy of the human body will be used. Take the human body as analogous to the nation. Is the human body just the sum of all of its organs? No. To say the human body is merely the sum of its organs is to ignore how the organs interact with each other, how each organ serves a specific role in the maintenance and survival of the greater human body, how the organs overall are arranged and organized to achieve the greater interest that is that of the greater human body, how each individual organ is dependent on other organs and therefore the greater human body for its own survival.

It's Not Just About Cheaper Product

While it is true that autarky can cost a nation in the present more, what liberal capitalists fail to understand is that national interests are not just the interests of its individual members that exist in the present. National interests also consist of the interests of the future members of the nation. In addition, as Friedrich List has already pointed out in The National System of Political Economy, there is a big difference between merely possessing wealth and possessing the power to generate wealth.

Liberal capitalists who are quick to point out current expenses of autarky and bewail the loss in efficiency fail to also point out that in order to be able to pay for imported goods, a nation must actually be able to generate the wealth required to pay for said imported goods. If a nation exports all of its industry overseas because other nations can manufacture its goods for cheaper, how then is this hypothetical nation supposed to obtain the wealth needed to actually be able to engage in trade? Free trade apologists seem to forget the fact that trade is not a one way street; trade requires you to give something up in exchange for something.

Autarky, with its focus on the development of the productive power of the nation, therefore ensures that a nation will always have the means to not only provide for its citizens, but for the wealth needed when the nation is engaging in trade with other nations. The purpose of autarky is not for cheaper product, but as a means of survival for the nation.

The Importance of the Political

Another problem with the free trade ideology is the existence of politics and particular nations, which have their own particular interests and therefore can also be your political enemy.

Politics and nations are not things that can simply be ignored and dismissed as a mere sign of barbarism, as liberals and other free trade apologists would have you believe. The reality is that the political must come before the economic, and not the other way around, contrary to what liberal capitalists believe, with all their talk about how the government should not interfere with the economy and all. One does not simply make the political and the concept of political enemies go away because he does not like politics and writes books that pretend that the political does not exist in his analysis, metaphorically sticking his head in the sand.

If we are to accept Carl Schmitt's formulation of the essence of the political as the friend-enemy distinction, then the political will only vanish if political enemies no longer exist. Therefore, the free trade ideology, if applied universally (which is what free trade apologists do), can only be valid if all nations are friends with each other. Even if you do not completely buy Carl Schmitt's formulation of the essence of politics, what is undeniable is that free trade between two nations can only exist if these two nations are at least at peace with each other and are in a union of sorts.

How else then is free trade practical and stable in any way? It is impossible for countries at war to engage in free trade with one another for all sorts of security reasons for one, as well as the fact that they are political enemies and therefore the assumption that the different nations should work with each other for their mutual benefit is invalid.

Therefore, autarky, whose object is to build up domestic industry, is completely practical from a political point of view. Autarky allows a nation to not be unnecessarily exposed to the intrigues of other nations, which can very well be the political enemies of our hypothetical nation. Autarky thus allows a nation more freedom in its actions and is a strong guarantor for national sovereignty because said nation is not dependent on other political entities for its own sustenance.

Conclusion

It should be clear by now that autarky, contrary to what some might believe, is not insane or impractical. On the contrary, autarky is completely practical from the national and political point of view, more so than universal free trade since unlike universal free trade, autarky accounts for the very real fact that particular nations exist and therefore a nation must engage with political entities that can be its enemies, very much unlike the liberal worldview who cannot resist talking about the "universal brotherhood of man", "universal rights of man", et cetera.