Trevor Watkins is the founder of the Individualist Movement, the author of two books, and a contributing author for the Free Market Foundation. He publishes on a blog at libertarian.org.za.
For interviews:
debbischoltz@fmfsa.org
The views expressed in the article are the author's and not necessarily shared by the members of the Foundation.
--
This article may be republished without prior consent but with acknowledgement to the author.
The FMF is an independent, non-profit, public benefit organisation, created in 1975 by pro-free market business and civil society national bodies to work for
a non-racial, free and prosperous South Africa.
As a policy organisation it promotes sound economic policies and the principles
of good law. As a think tank it seeks and puts forward solutions to some of the country's most pressing problems: unemployment, poverty, growth, education, health care, electricity supply, and more. The FMF was instrumental in the post-apartheid negotiations and directly influenced the Constitutional Commission to include the property
rights clause: a critical cornerstone of economic freedom.
CONTACT US
+27 11 884 0270
FMF@fmfsa.org
PO Box 4056, Cramerview 2060
|
|
|
This article was first published by Daily Friend on 22 July 2023
Underwriting freedom – a proposal to the Musk Foundation
If, in a fit of fabulous philanthropy, Elon Musk decided to donate 10% of a billion dollars (00 million, about R2 billion, or .0005 of his net wealth) to the best proposal on how to address the current South African catastrophe, what would you suggest? Here is my proposal.
Avoiding catastrophe in Southern Africa - a proposal to the Musk Foundation
South Africa is in bad shape. The problems are mostly political. Bad ideologies leading to bad strategies which result in widespread corruption and failure. Apartheid socialism in the past, Marxist socialism in the present. These are the harsh realities: Countries and societies do fail with awful consequences; you can’t please everyone; there is no free lunch; competence and competition are critical to our survival.
South Africa does not lack resources. It does not lack competent people – world class banks, mines, farms, insurance companies, manufacturing industries. It has a history of innovation, in the form of the world’s deepest mines, its first heart transplant, and Kreepy Krauly.
Why should deeply disillusioned South Africans trust any proposals for a new structure?
South Africans of all persuasions are reasonably proud of and united around our existing constitution, despite its flaws. It is subscribed to by all registered political parties. It does not inspire partisan animosities. By undertaking to enforce the provisions of the existing constitution you can avoid endless debate over technicalities.
The South African constitution is however little understood and rarely observed. Most citizens cannot imagine an alternative to an all-powerful state controlling the levers of power. We have sacrificed our freedom to the illusory safety and security we believe only the state can provide. The only question is: which gang gets to run the state?, and even that is only decided every 5fiveyears. I call this ‘the bigger gang theory’ of governance.
South Africa is a country deeply divided by race, income, ideology, expectations. The country is on the brink of becoming a failed state with policing, judiciary, infrastructure, education, and health services all near collapse. However, the constitution is one of the few unifying forces, admired and respected by the vast majority.
To succeed, any proposed solution must be non-political, sustainable, and free market-based. And indeed there is an alternative which has operated for centuries: insurance.
Insurance can provide most of the safety and security services which the state currently offers, at much lower cost and with far greater efficiency.
I propose the concept of ‘Freedom Insurance’.
The objective is to provide a superior structure for guaranteeing the rights entrenched in the Bill of Rights of the South African constitution, in the interests of all South Africans.
I propose that the Musk Foundation funds and capitalises a new insurance company (provisionally known as ‘Freedom Insurance (FI)’) which will underwrite and guarantee specific sections of the Bill of Rights.
Like any insurance company, FI will sell policies to individuals and groups. These policies will cover losses arising from adverse events or violations of the Bill of Rights – life, property, bodily integrity, captivity – subject to specific conditions.
It will be available to all residents of South Africa, but it will not be free. In all cases the actions undertaken by FI will be subject to the terms of the client’s policy and their payment status.
Freedom Insurance will be well-placed to underwrite the rights to equality (section 9), life (section 11), freedom and security of the person (section 12), privacy (section 14), and freedom of movement and residence (section 21), among others.
In order to ensure the safety and integrity of the donated funds, I suggest they be placed in a trust. Board Members must be strictly non-political. Suggestions include Elon Musk, Wendy Appelbaum, Rob Herzov, Johann Rupert, Patrice Motsepe, and Magda Wierczyka.
A competent executive structure must be set up. Suggestions include Nick Hudson of PANDA, Wayne Duvenhage of OUTA, Thuli Madonsela of Stellenbosch University, and forensic investigator Paul O’Sullivan.
Partners, in the form of security agencies, arbitration agencies, banks, and legal firms, would need to be recruited.
Conclusion
This article suggests a way to address the current South African crisis. It is an economic solution, not a political one. It leverages widespread popular support for the constitution and would provide real-world benefits to most South African residents. It is not a revolutionary proposal but falls completely within the ambit of the existing Bill of Rights.
Individually, South Africans are at the mercy of the gangs – political, criminal, and economic. Freedom Insurance can provide a unifying structure, a rallying point, for powerful but legal resistance to the depredations of the state and its cronies.
|
|
|