National-Anarchism 101: the Bask beans consumer

Even though Europe is home to somewhat 50 different cultures with all different languages and different institutions on a considerably small continent, these cultural entities never merged or mixed. Some disappeared and some sprouted from others, but an actual mix never occurred. That is of course due to an already “positions” starting point for the peoples of Europe and the regionalist identitarian institutions that have sprouted from that. In an economic analysis one could argue that the value of a single national identity, say, the Basks in the Northern Spain and Southern France, is considerably high, due to its objective scarceness and relative scarceness in relationship with the other identities of Europe. The cost on the other hand would be high(er), because of the high transaction costs, both mercantile, legal and political. This would become clear in a market situation setting. Imagine a Bask supermarket with a bean aisle. A Bask comes in with a desire, a want to buy beans. The supermarket sells 4 types of beans. The Chinese beans are the cheapest. Wages of the bean farmers are set very low by the Chinese centralised economy and the state largely stimulates export, which of course result in a low consumer price. However, the quality is poor and the Bask wishes not to purchase the Chinese beans. The American beans are also very cheap. Not as cheap as the Chinese ones, but the quality is much higher than the Chinese beans are cheaper. So the American beans have a disproportionate advantage over the Chinese beans, even though American wages are higher and export is not that extremely subsidised. The French beans are considerably expensive. French Mercantilist and protectionist policy charges a high export taxation and bean production is very capital-intensive. The quality is the beans does not differ much from the American beans. They are better, but the price is disproportionately higher than the American beans’ quality. So out of these 3, the rational economic consumer would buy the American beans for their price-quality relation: cheap beans with a high quality. Purchasing American beans would creative incentives for Chinese farmers and authorities to invest in quality and for French government to cut taxes and revise the wage scales. Or it would – as David Ricardo already showed us – stimulate the American farmers to grow beans and force the Chinese to grow something they are relatively better at, say, rice.

But there is a fourth type of beans. Bask beans. Now, the Basks do not have a bean-growing tradition and the bean is not a common food product in Bask cuisine. So the bean farmers are scarce, as is, of course, their bean production. Now, because the learn-effect (the more a production technique is embedded in a culture, the more efficient it is produced and allocated) does not play a significant role within the Bask context, because the demand is low, the production cost of a single Bask been is higher than the production cost of the American, the Chinese or the French bean. The quality is also considerably low, because the low demand does not force the bean farmers to invest in quality, nor in a lower production cost. Now, in the supermarket, the Bask beans are not as expensive as the French beans (but considerably expensive), but their quality is seemingly lower than the French beans’ quality.


Now, within an American, non-identitarian, rational economic cost-benefit analysis the consumer would prefer the American beans. Relatively low price and good quality. If there wouldn’t be American beans anymore for whatever reason or if the price would go disproportionately up in relationship with the Bask consumers purchase power, the European inflation and the quality of the American bean, the consumer would switch to French beans. Those are seemingly more expensive than the American beans, but the quality is similar, or even better. Relatively speaking, it wouldn’t matter a great deal, because of the disappearance of American beans or its rising prices.

Now if the French beans would disappear and assuming he does not want to choose a substitute product for beans, the rational consumer now has two options left: the Chinese cheapest beans with poor quality, or the Bask expensive beans with poor quality. He would, of course, choose the Chinese beans. Stretching this situation both over time and space, the Bask bean farmers would be forced to grow something else because nobody wants their beans. It’s as simple as that and I think we would all agree on that. And the Americans and French would still be able to produce beans and produce a significant bean supply for the significant bean demand. Even the Chinese would rationally keep producing a certain amount of beans in order to answer to the discriminatory demand for the cheapest beans (due to low wages or rational greed). This as a whole would be a perfect, sound and rational market situation and the rational libertarian would agree on both the consumer’s decision and the producer’s decision.

Now, the identitarian Bask would not follow that same pattern. Without choosing the same analytical think pattern as his non-identitarian fellow consumer, he would also use free market principles to analyse the market situation before him (the four types of beans) and make a “rational” free market decision. He wouldn’t buy the American beans. Even though there is no information deficit (it says on the bowl the beans are American and the identitarian consumer knows their price and quality), his anti-American sentiment, common within most of the European nations and traditions, is dear to him and therefore he sets a higher subjective price. Adding the price of his aversion to the price of the beans (wages minus subsidies plus taxes), the American beans would be the most expensive of all four types. So, the Identitarian Bask, does not want to buy the American beans, who are in his opinion, the most expensive beans, maybe even considering their quality.

In fact, the identitarian Bask might have a general aversion towards all foreign products. He might hate Chinese communists, and hate French capitalists. He would buy the Bask beans. They are home grown and because of that most valuable to the Bask consumer. The relative value the Bask grants his Bask beans is higher than the market value, therefore he will buy the Bask beans, analysing the purchase as a reasonable market choice. Rational or not, the libertarian has no valid argument to protest this identitarian market choice. The consumer was offered a differentiated range of price and quality relations of a single basic product (the bean) and the consumer made a choice.


Now, let’s look at the consequences of the identitarian rational choice of the Bask consumer and change bean agriculture with drinking water production and bottling, because of water’s indispensible and inelastic nature (the demand for water will always remain constant). Yet, the few Bask water producers and bottlers, who charge a high price within their price cartel and because of the inelastic nature of the demand, will sell more than the big multinational water producers and bottlers, who can charge lower prices (lower production cost and high marginal value of production), because Bask consumers desire Bask water, produced and bottled by Bask labour, paid by Bask capital and sold on the Bask market. The European consumer will contribute a higher value to European products and a higher cost to say, American products (the social stigma of driving an American gas-guzzling car). Would it lead to any negative externalities because of the identitarian choice? Are identitarians around the world making false choices, even though they really are both consumers and producers on a free market place? I think not. And neither should the libertarian. I say the identitarian is a libertarian who has more economic parameters to make a free market choice. He cherishes the own, which is very precious to him. Even though there is no rational explanation for his choice, but a mere emotional, we cannot deny him this right, nor accuse him of not being free-market oriented.


However, the negative externalities only come about when governments come up with identitarian policies and start making these choices for the consumer, way before the individual consumer has an actual want or need.

A lot of European governments, mainly in Spain, Italy and France, have this identitarian reflex. They charge high import taxes to keep foreign substitute goods of their markets (in order for their constituents to “buy identitarian”). When Berlusconi asks his people not to fly with foreign airline companies but to fly identitarian, with Alitalia, he should just ask it, not tax foreign airlines to create artificial stimuli to fly with Alitalia.


I myself am, alongside a probable majority of Europeans, a convicted identitarian. I have a want to buy local goods, even if international free market goods might be cheaper or have a higher quality. I cherish the local aspect of goods and services and that is my right. However, being the identitarian I am, I will never allow governments to make identitarian choices for me. The government has no “right” to restrain both import and export. The government, whether it shares my identitarian, nationalist and segragist views or not, it has no right to make any choice of any sort in my place.

Unfortunately, most Europeans tend to differ and support government intervention in order to “save” the national identity. But then again, from an identitarian point of view I would wonder what the value of a culture and an identity is if it needs saving in order to survive: just like the company that cannot compete on the free market, regardless of its conditions, should be competed away, so should civilizations, cultures compete freely, with no governments to help them survive or want to destroy them.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: