Healthcare — No Contradictions Possible, not even Complex Ones

I’ve seen a number of bloggers make the claim that because healthcare demands often sometimes involve life and death scenarios, individual life and liberty go out the window — that individual rights are negated by the fact that someone, anyone, on death’s door is willing to pay whatever is necessary to save their life or their body from permanent and significant disability.

As such, free markets — ie freedom — don’t work* in healthcare.

*It should be noted that such a thing is never mentioned so explicitly. It’s always asserted in a round-a-bout, underhanded, soft, sophisticated sort of way. Mentioning it so directly too quickly and sharply reveals the contradiction, which is painful to accept as a premise in a number of ways yet for a sole reason — contradictions are anti-reality.

Which is a more advanced argument than “greedy corporations can’t be trusted”, or the even more primitive, “greedy corporations make “too much” profit”.

All of which are contradictory nonsense, no matter how cleverly crafted, argued, and debated for.

Why are they contradictory?

Because fundamental to our entire concept of “healthcare”, as pointed out in the video, is, freedom. Capitalism. Individual life, liberty, and property being protected, not violated, by government.

It is beyond nonsensical to say that absolute freedom does not work in “healthcare” — or any other area of any economy — because like all other human values, it’s source is man’s mind, which cannot function under force or compulsion. Every single advancement in medicine and healthcare was a product of individuals working under a capitalist system, to whatever degree was possible in their given time and under their government.

The very profession of “doctor” is a product of capitalism. It’s creation had nothing to fucking do with government. The same goes for our modern concept of hospital — and everything in it.

Nothing we have today in healthcare was possible without freedom. Everything good is a product of man’s mind. Every ailment and problem in healthcare is a product of abandoning man’s mind, either through the direct force of government, or it’s failure to protect individual rights.

It’s failure to remove force from human relationships, and it’s success in incrementally turning doctors into soft slaves.


Police officers are  not responsible for you getting raped and showing up 2 hours late.

Emergency room doctors like Doug McGuff on the other hand, face $50,000  in fines for refusing to take in accident victims. That’s $50,000 USD worth of Doug McGuff’s property, confiscated by force, for choosing a certain profession, and violating the rights of no one in the exercise of that profession.

Makes me fucking sick — almost as sick as seeing this “necessary evil” taken to new heights by stating that absolute individual liberty doesn’t work in “healthcare”, or any other area of economy.

— Anthony Dream Johnson

About Anthony Dream Johnson

CEO, founder, and architect of The 21 Convention, Anthony Dream Johnson is the leading force behind the world's first and only "panorama event for life on earth". He has been featured on WGN Chicago, and in the NY Times #1 best seller The Four Hour Work Week.    His stated purpose for the work he does is "the actualization of the ideal man", a purpose that has led him to found and host The 21 Convention across 3 continents and for 6 years in a row. Anthony blogs vigorously at and

4 Responses to Healthcare — No Contradictions Possible, not even Complex Ones

  1. Hugo October 15, 2011 at 4:53 pm #

    Excellent post, Anthony. I completely agree with you and love your point about the cops versus doctors.

  2. Geoff October 17, 2011 at 11:33 am #

    “The very profession of “doctor” is a product of capitalism. It’s creation had nothing to fucking do with government. The same goes for our modern concept of hospital — and everything in it.”

    The foundational concept of capitalism is efficient markets. Health care is not a market good because 1) it’s impossible to make an uncoerced decision about ones own life and 2) the supply and demand are not subject to market forces.

    I agree that private doctors should not be required to take in anyone by law, but I also agree with the spirit of the law that we should protect life. The solution, of course, is a public option for healthcare. This would include public hospitals as well as voluntary agreements with private hospitals on terms of payment. Because it is a public “option” rather than a “requirement,” there is still room left open for private health insurance, private innovation, private doctors, etc. While funding for this public option would occur through tax dollars, people should have the ability to opt out and get a rebate on their premium.

    • Anthony Dream Johnson October 17, 2011 at 1:13 pm #

      Taxation being involuntary rather than voluntary and fee based is where we differ, as well as in the “opt out” notion. If individuals want to partake in something public it needs to be opted into. Opting out sets the stage to make it involuntary by slow and incremental decay on a multitude of levels.

      • Geoff October 17, 2011 at 4:31 pm #

        Sounds about right as to the terms and degree of our disagreement. I might even take it a step further and assert that our difference of opinion on the voluntary nature of taxation is the same difference as we see with the opt out versus opt in.

Make your mark