Spontaneous Order

One of the fundamental tenets of a free market outlook is that many individual human beings, each pursuing their own selfish interests, will interact to the benefit of society as a whole.

Adam Smith was the first to espouse this concept, later dubbed spontaneous order. He proposed that the actions of men are guided by an invisible hand that somehow directs people towards a desirable outcome for all.

Economists analyze human action in a variety of ways to try to understand why a spontaneous order even exists. Some, like F.A. Hayek, argued that the the source of spontaneous order could not be fully understood by men. Others argue that it is no order at all, and instead propose various schemes and plans that will bring about a proper order to society.

Hayek described this attitude as fatal conceit, that a few men could plan society. Replacing the spontaneous order that erupts from free interaction among individuals with a cobbled-together, totatalitarian order does not only kill freedom. It kills growth, innovation, and genuine, natural society itself.

Bureaucracy

American government has trended further towards complete bureaucratic management over the past fifty years. Abraham Lincoln started down the path of centralization in the mid nineteenth century, paving the way for a fully centralized bureaucracy. The Progressive movement, in its fervor to organize society in a better way, gained momentum in the twentieth century. Later national figures, from Franklin Roosevelt to Dwight Eisenhouwer, all contributed to the growth in one way or another.

Bureaucracy is not inherently an evil. It is simply a method of management, and is properly suited to many tasks where strict adherence to rules is necessary, like law enforcement. The great danger in a centralized bureaucracy is its application to areas where it is not suited, such as the economy or education. 

Bureaucratic management involves a systematic methodology, with no oppportunity for deviation from an already established order. Real progress requires liberty, not constraints.

[For further reading, see Bureaucracy by Ludwig von Mises.]

Money

What is money? The standard answer is currency. An economist might respond that it's a medium of exchange, or a unit of value, or some other use. Money most simply is, in fact, a medium of exchange. What does that mean?

Money can be thought of as a commodity like any other, like corn or gold. The primary difference between money and any other good is what people want money for. In most cases, if somebody wants to buy a bushel of corn, they probably want the corn itself. However, money is a commodity desired for its ability to attain other goods. Simply put, money is a good people trade to get other goods.

Money is distinct from any other good in a barter economy insofar that many people want it, making trades easier and more frequent. Without money, modern civilization and a modern economy simply would not exist.

[This was heavily inspired by What Has Government Done to Our Money by Murray Rothbard and On the Origin of Money by Carl Menger.]