===== PAGE 1 ===== 111L REMAN © August 1998 Vol. 48, No. 8 F EATU RES Technology and Happiness by Allan Levite Affluence and human contentment. 458 How to Get Action by Leonard E. Read Self-improvement is the key to advancing liberty. pr 461 How Environmentalism Disdains the Poor by E. Calvin Beisner Growing economies are the environment’s—and the poor’s—best hope. P 464 It’s a Jungle Out There! What We Can Learn from the Privatization of Zoos by Keith Wade Two Pittsburgh institutions show the way. 469 Mafia Capitalism or Red Legacy? by Gary Dempsey and Aaron Lukas The truth behind Russia’s organized-crime wave. 473 A Letter from Russia by Grigory Shishatsky Observations from our unofficial Russian correspondent. ¥ 478 Great Myths of the Great Depression by Lawrence W. Reed A review of the facts. 485 Capitalism: Discrimination’s Implacable Enemy by John Hood How business success reduces race and sex bias. 490 Pounds of Prevention—OQunces of Cure by George C. Leef Government’s clumsy and coercive efforts to protect us. 494 Individualist Feminism: The Lost Tradition by Wendy McElroy Rediscovering a deep, rich history. COLUMNS Center NOTES from FEE—Arrogant Antitrusters by Donald J. Boudreaux Me N 467 POTOMAC PRINCIPLES—Outmoded Paternalism by Doug Bandow EE 476 PERIPATETICS—Creative Apathy by Sheldon Richman P4483 ECONOMIC NOTIONS—Specialization and Wealth by Dwight R. Lee 500 ECONOMICS on TRIAL—What’s Left of Marxism? by Mark Skousen 511 THE PURSUIT of HAPPINESS—Who Wins in Strikes? by Charles W. Baird DEPARTMENTS 450 Perspective—All the World’s a Classroom by Sheldon Richman 452 It Just Ain’t So! by Donald J. Boudreaux 502 Book Reviews *Why Our Children Can’t Read and What We Can Do About It by Diane McGuinness, reviewed by Samuel L. Blumenfeld; Liberal Racism by Jim Sleeper, reviewed by Brad Stetson; Common Sense and Common Law for the Environment: Creating Wealth in Hummingbird Economies by Bruce Yandle, reviewed by P.J. Hill; The Virtue of Civility: Selected Essays on Liberalism, Tradition, and Civil Society by Edward Shils, reviewed by Robert A. Sirico; Property and Freedom by Bernard H. Siegan, reviewed by George C. Leef; J.-B. Say: An Economist in Troubled Times, edited by R. R. Palmer, reviewed by Aaron Steelman. ===== PAGE 2 ===== [REMAN ~~ rersreeroe ddcas On Liberty All the World’s a Classroom Published by . . . The Foundation for Economic Education Economic education can happen any time, Irvington-on-Hudson, NY 10533 any place, at any age. Economics is the study Phone (914) 591-7230 FAX (914) 591-8910 of action and its implications for production E-mail: freeman@fee.org FEE Home Page: http://www.fee.org and exchange. As such, it is accessible to chil- President: Donald J. Boudreaux dren from an early age. Since every child acts, . : chooses, and exchanges, nothing is more Editor: Sheldon Richman g g within the reach of children than the basics of Managing Editor: Beth A. Hoffman . . y economics properly conceived. It’s simply a Editor E eritus matter of making the implicit explicit. Book Review Editor One of the offenses that the modern eco- George C. Leef nomics profession should have to answer for Editorial Assistant is rendering the discipline dull, dismal, and Mary Ann Murphy . . mostly irrelevant. Had my first contact with Columnists Baird the subject been Econ 101 at Temple Univer- Doug Bandow sity, I'd have written it off as useless right Dwight R. Lee there. (On the other hand, had former Temple Lawrence W. Reed econ prof Walter Williams been there during Mark Skousen my stint, things would have been entirely Walter Williams different.) Contributing Editors No surprise that we find economics lessons Peter J. Boettke wherever we look. Choice is everywhere. It’s Clarence B. Carson Thomas J. DiLorenzo made necessary by scarcity, which itself is the Burton W. Folsom, Jr. result of valuation. Something becomes Joseph S. Fulda scarce only when human beings find a use for Bettina Bien Greaves it. Crude oil was all too abundant until a Yale Robert Higgs University chemist distilled kerosene from it John Hospers in the nineteenth century. Before that, a dirt Raymond J. Keating farmer who found oil would pay someone to Danie} B. Klein take it away. After that, he moved to Beverly Wendy McElroy Tibor R. Machan . Hills, that is. This doesn’t work in reverse: rare things are not necessarily valuable— R Nash A N oni smallpox, for example. und A. Opitz My daughters, son (ages 14, 12, and 10), James L. Payne ? oo and I recently saw a commercial offering lot- William H. Peterson . . Jone 5. Shaw tery winners whose cash would be paid out Richard H. Timberlake over 20 years a lump sum right now. “Why Lawrence H. White would that company or a lottery winner be . . 9 . The Freeman is the monthly publication of The Foundation for Eco- interested mn that deal? : a sked the kids. nomic Education, Inc., Irvington-on-Hudson, NY 10533. FEE, There ensued a lively discussion of exchange, established in 1946 by Leonard E. Read, is a non-political, educational . . | d champion of private property, the free market, and limited government. time, and interest. They had no troub € undcr- FEE is classified as a 26 USC 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organization. 3 3 111 Copyright © 1998 by The Foundation for Economic Education. Per- standing why someone might trade a million mission is granted to reprint any article in this issue, provided credit is dollars payable at $ 50,000 over 20 years for given and two copies of the reprinted material are sent to FEE. . iqq- The costs of Foundation projects and services are met through dona- something less than a million dollars today. tions, which are invited in any amount. Donors of $30.00 or more receive a subscription to The Freeman. For foreign delivery, a donation They couldn’t say how much less they would of $45.00 a year is suggested to cover mailing costs. Student subscrip- 1 tions are $10.00 for the nine-month academic year; $5.00 per semester. accept, but they got the prncip le. Actually, we Additional copies of this issue of The Freeman are $3.00 each. had discussed “time preference” on an earlier Bound volumes of The Freeman are available from The Foundation - for calendar years 1972 to date. The Freeman is available in microform occasion, when 1 asked them to choose from University Microfilms, 300 N. Zeeb Rd., Ann Arbor, MI 48106. between having one candy bar today or two 450 ===== PAGE 3 ===== next week. That provoked a good discussion. Herbert Hoover and Franklin Delano Roo- Economics is everywhere because alterna- sevelt. Lawrence Reed, taking a break from tives are everywhere. To be is to act. To look his monthly column, explains. around is to find oneself in the best econom- Anti-capitalists are apt to pin every possi- ics classroom. ble charge on the free market, even when the charges contradict each other. Business peo- * * x ple put profits before people. What’s more, they gladly forgo money in order to discrimi- People who don’t like industrial society nate against workers and customers on the often complain that technology makes us no basis of irrelevant attributes. John Hood - happier than our forebears were. Perhaps. But shows how charge number one cancels out does that mean modern gadgetry is not worth charge number two. having? Allan Levite isn’t so sure. Leave it to government to get even old We continue our observance of the 100th adages wrong. George Leef considers the case anniversary of FEE founder Leonard E. of preventions and cures. Read’s birth with his article on libertarian Feminism is nearly monopolized today by methodology, “How to Get Action.” women who want to use government to build The environmental movement undercuts its a society according to their vision of justice own stated goals whenever it proposes mea- and equality. It wasn’t always so. Wendy sures that would stifle industrial progress in McElroy honors the nineteenth century’s for- the developing world. That’s because, as gotten classical-liberal feminists. Calvin Beisner writes, a healthful environ- Our columnists this month once again find ment requires affluence. topics to delight liberty lovers and vex the sta- Many government services have been can- tists. Doug Bandow examines ways to solve didates for privatization. But what about the problem of underage drinking. Dwight something as complex as a zoo? Keith Wade Lee explains how we grow richer, thanks to tells of two Pittsburgh animal parks that are that form of cooperation known as the divi- doing quite well in private hands. sion of labor. Mark Skousen reports on the The image of Russia today is one of a land publication of a fancy new edition of The writhing under a crude embryonic capitalism Communist Manifesto. And Charles Baird dominated by organized crime. Gary discusses new evidence that even union work- Dempsey and Aaron Lukas look deeper and ers are harmed by strikes. see, instead, a land suffering the vestiges of Our reviewers have perused worthwhile Bolshevism. books on race, the common law and the envi- But despite its problems, life improves for ronment, property rights, civility, economist Russians, at least those who are open to the Jean-Baptiste Say, and on how children changes and uncertainties of civil society. So learn—and don’t learn—to read. writes Grigory Shishatsky in his “Letter from And now for something new. Turn the page Russia.” for the debut of “It Just Ain’t So!”—a lively There was no Great Depression. But there feature that exposes flaws and fallacies of was a Great, Great, Great, Great Depression, popular economic journalism. courtesy of foolhardy policies from both —SHELDON RICHMAN 451 ===== PAGE 4 ===== FREEMAN deas On Libert, ° | of Technology Review, argues (among other It Just Ain t So . wrongheaded things) that (1) Adam Smith was no great friend of free trade; (2) Smith believed that the interests of business people generally conflict with those of the public; (3) We should have an annual awards event Smith would have opposed privatization of called the “Economic Bloopers Bash.” government services; and (4) free trade and Straight-thinking economists and others colonialism are largely identical. could be entertained by dramatic renderings If Schlefer’s portrayal of Smith as a mixed- of allegedly serious articles, official docu- economy enthusiast were accurate, it would ments, and broadcasts issued during the pre- indeed be a colossal blow to the cause of free vious twelve months. The uproar from the markets. After all, discovering that Adam audience would be deafening! Not only is Smith was really nothing more than the economic asininity abundant, but much of it Richard Gephardt of eighteenth-century Scot- is so rich in misunderstanding that it serves as land would surely spawn malignant doubts excellent intellectual slapstick. about the entire edifice of classical-liberal As with most awards ceremonies, the Eco- scholarship. nomics Bloopers Bash would feature different Fortunately, Schlefer’s Smith is a phantasm. categories of awards—for example, the award Let’s examine each of Schlefer’s con- for “Silliest Government Regulation”; the tentions in turn. First, he claimed that Adam award for “Wackiest Editorial by a Major Smith really was no great free trader. Schle- Newspaper”; and the “Bobbing Anchor fer’s evidence for this astonishing claim is that Prize,” awarded to the network news host who Smith’s famous mention of the invisible hand utters the year’s stupidest on-air line. Compe- occurs in a passage from The Wealth of tition would be stiff, but dedicated judges Nations which argues that among the benefits would settle on winners in each category. is that (in Schlefer’s words) “entrepreneurs Alas, economists are busy people—too ... invest at home rather than abroad.” busy to attend such an awards ceremony. So, Smith does indeed argue that, all other instead, The Freeman will occasionally fea- things equal, entrepreneurs will tend to ture a critical analysis of a recent piece of invest at home. Investors prefer to keep per- popular economic writing. Our aim is not to sonal tabs on how their investments are criticize for the sake of criticizing. Rather, by employed. And investments close to home exposing the flaws that mar much of what can more easily be monitored than can passes today for economic journalism, we investments made in faraway lands. Smith hope to inspire in readers a more critical also said that domestic investments directly stance toward what is advanced as economic create more employment at home than do information by newspapers, magazines, tele- investments in foreign countries. He rea- vision, and radio. soned that profits from domestic investment Our inaugural column examines Jonathan are more quickly realized than are profits Schlefer’s bizarre essay “Today’s Most Mis- from investments made abroad. Therefore, to chievous Misquotation,” appearing in the the extent that the reinvestment of profits March 1998 issue of The Atlantic Monthly. In creates jobs, they will be created quicker less than three pages, Schlefer, former editor from investment at home. 452 ===== PAGE 5 ===== 453 But as a Generation-Xer would snidely ask, fer from Smith’s opposition to government- “S000000000?” protected monopolies is that Smith would Nothing that Smith said qualified his oppose privatization! Smith did indeed detest endorsement of free trade. Free trade has long government-protected monopolies such as the been accused of “shipping jobs abroad.” Dutch East India Company—but he detested Smith took pains to show that this accusation them not because they were private companies is false. But he also argued that profitable but because they were monopolies. Schiefer’s investment opportunities at home will not persistence in equating “capitalist” with remain unexploited. “monopolist” prevents him from understand- Therefore, Schlefer’s assertion that Smith ing not only Smith, but economics in general. praised the invisible hand only insofar as it Schlefer’s misunderstandings extend far promoted domestic investment is mistaken. beyond misreading Adam Smith’s text. Con- It is no less ludicrous than inferring from sider what Schlefer says in response to Milton Friedman’s claim that the free mar- Smiths opposition to colonial wars waged ket would supply good postal service that “for the purpose of raising up a nation of cus- Friedman supports the free market only tomers.” Schlefer says, “He raised a point that insofar as it supplies good postal service. we might at least consider: is our globaliza- Schlefer is wrong also to claim that Smith tion just a new mercantilism?” believed that the interests of “large capital- By what logic is expanded free trade ists” and of the public are generally in con- equivalent to mercantilism in general or to flict. Where Schlefer gets this notion is any- colonial wars in particular? Mercantilism’s body’s guess. essence is the threat by government to Perhaps Schlefer assumes that Smith’s restrain its citizens (with violence, if neces- opposition to government-sponsored monop- sary) from dealing voluntarily with foreign- olies means that Smith saw capitalists as the ers on terms disapproved by the government. natural enemy of the public. If this is the In short, mercantilism is founded on govern- source of Schlefer’s take on Smith, then ment force. Schlefer should consult a dictionary on the In contrast, globalization results when peo- difference between “competition” and ple are free to trade peacefully with residents “monopoly.” Smith knew the difference; his of other countries. Global free trade is found- 1776 book is a long treatise explaining why ed on peace. With free trade, firms certainly the wealth of nations is increased by capital- do try to win foreign customers—but they do ists unaided by government-granted privi- so only by offering attractive products at leges and decreased by capitalists protected attractive prices. To equate this peaceful and by such privileges. Here’s a selection from productive means of gaining customers with Smith on the subject: mercantilism’s reliance on warships and armies is to display a breathtaking inability to make distinctions. Global free trade has no more in common with mercantilism than the Waldorf-Astoria Hotel has with a Soviet gulag. People eat and sleep in both, but would Schlefer find accommodations in one compa- rable to accommodations in the other? To nearly everything Jonathan Schlefer writes in his March 1998 piece in The Atlantic Monthly, we say “It just ain’t so!” Od We leave it for the reader to determine —DONALD J. BOUDREAUX whether Smith saw the interests of capitalists, large or small, as being necessarily at odds (Jonathan Schlefer's article can be found on the with those of the public. World Wide Web at www.theatlantic.com/issues/98mar/ Another peculiar inference drawn by Schle- misquote. htm.) Every individual is continually exerting himself to find out the most advantageous employment for whatever capital he can command. It is his own advantage, indeed, and not that of the society, which he has in view. But the study of his own advantage naturally, or rather necessarily leads him to prefer that employment which is most advantageous to the society. ===== PAGE 6 ===== FREEMAN deas On Libert Technology and Happiness by Allan Levite hile surfing the Internet one day, I ideas have been more often encountered in chanced upon an article by Jay Hanson, literature than the notion that acquiring titled “The Woes of Modern Society”! In material possessions results in waste, greed, most respects it was standard environmental- envy, and violence. Boredom with affluence, ist fare, bemoaning modern technology and or the actual rejection of it, did not even the harm it has allegedly done to the earth and begin with the hippie movement of the mid- to humanity. Other writers have already dealt 1960s. Literary attacks on “luxury” inces- at length with the exaggerations and misstate- santly appeared during the increasingly ments of the “green” movement,2 but Hanson affluent late 1700s, coming from such well- has touched on a more philosophic issue that known writers as Smollett, Pope, Swift, I want to address specifically—namely, the Rousseau, and Bolingbroke.3 relationship between technology, affluence, To this day, it is difficult to enter a book- and human happiness. store without seeing yet another book from a Technology and consumerism, he declares, major publisher that presents similar argu- have not brought greater happiness to human- ments all over again, to the accompaniment ity, as most people had previously believed of pomp and fanfare. In 1993 alone, not they would. “Instead of richer and happier,” counting the anti-growth primers by environ- he claims, “we see that traditional economic mentalists, three books from major publish- development has actually made us poorer and ers trumpeted the same set of assumptions— un-happier. Indeed, history has shown us that competition and the pursuit of material (very forcefully) that the pursuit of traditional goods are destructive, and that mankind’s economic development is actually the pursuit urge to consume is wasteful, vulgar, and self- of un-happiness.” defeating: Land of Desire by William Leach, Fools Gold by Andrew Schmookler, and An Old Story Punished by Rewards by Alfie Kohn. The year 1994 checked in with 4 Nation of Sales- Today’s green movement, in some respects, men: The Tyranny of the Market and the Sub- is a new force in political philosophy. But version of Culture by Earl Shorris. Going before we begin to think that Hanson’s anti- back to 1989 we find The Hunger for More: materialistic diatribe constitutes a new argu- Searching for Values in An Age of Greed by ment, we should stop to consider that few Lawrence Shames and The Poverty of Afflu- ence by Paul Wachtel—which, however, was issued by a minor publisher. Allan Levite is a freelance writer residing in San One thing to bear in mind is that the anti- Francisco, California. materialistic theme seems to be the national 454 ===== PAGE 7 ===== 455 anthem of writers, intellectuals, and debonair Hanson’s problem is that he confuses satis- socialites, which suggests that the social guilt faction, which results from specific acts or sit- so typically experienced by these all-too-com- uations, with overall, general contentment. fortable individuals is not unrelated to the His argument against technological develop- philosophy itself. We rarely hear complaints ment along these lines is comparable to say- about “excess consumption” coming from ing that baseball fans will never be truly those who cannot afford luxuries, but rather happy unless their team wins the World Series from those who are jaded by them. George every year. In a sense that might be true, at Lichtheim, in his not unsympathetic history least for the most rabid partisans of their of socialism, made a similar observation, but respective teams, but it hardly proves that the more bluntly, when he wrote that there is no fans do not enjoy going to the stadium to need to waste time on the demand that the watch games being played, or that this pas- consumer society be abolished. “This kind of time is unimportant to them. talk,” according to Lichtheim, “commonly In claiming that technology and affluence issues from people who do not have to work do not prevent unhappiness, Hanson might for a living.”4 just as well have said that if a person lives long enough, he or she will almost certainly Contentment’s Table experience the death of both parents, perhaps some other relatives as well, and perhaps even of Contents some close friends. Whether we speak of this To bolster his argument that technologi- occurring during the Dark Ages or today, such cal development and increased production Personal tragedies produce grief and unhappi- have not increased the happiness of ness, so happiness will always be something mankind as a whole, Hanson cites regular that has definite limits. No matter what state surveys by the University of Chicago’s current technology has reached, the transitory National Opinion Research Center, which eXistence of happiness is likely to be inter- have indicated that the number of Ameri- rupted by episodes of grief and loss. (Thomas cans who claim to be “very happy” (around Jefferson was astute enough, when writing the a third of the population) is no greater now Declaration of Independence, to speak of the than it was in 1957, despite the fact that the Pursuit of happiness, not its attainment, which gross national product and personal con- he realized was rare and fleeting.) sumption expenditures per capita have near- Therefore, Hanson would be right if he ly doubled since then. claimed that material possessions cannot sub- But Hanson has responded to the wrong stitute for family pleasures, and that riches question with the wrong answer. First of all, it cannot compensate for the loss of loved ones. is fairly impressive that an entire third of the But this is not their purpose. Technology does population considers itself not merely happy, Dot exist to affect human happiness in the but “very” happy, and perhaps this indicator overall sense, but to increase specific satisfac- has not increased because it is already as high ions. Satisfaction and happiness are not the as it can go. As he pointed out himself, the same thing, nor does one necessarily follow main determinants of happiness are unrelated {rom the other. Technology may or may not to consumption, consisting of such things as increase overall happiness, but it can make satisfaction with family life (especially mar- specific tasks easier so that individuals can do riage), satisfaction with work, and leisure to more, make more things, and—yes—have develop talents and friendships. This hardly more things. constitutes an argument that industrialism and affluence do not guarantee happiness, because To Do Is Better than to Make Do happiness is such a subjective, personal, and fragile condition that any number of things Since Hanson’s article appeared on the can jeopardize it, and nothing can possibly Internet, it is safe to assume that he composed guarantee it. it on a computer equipped with word-process- ===== PAGE 8 ===== 456 THE FREEMAN ee AUGUST 1998 ing software. Using the technology of thirty To Live Is to Achieve years ago, he would have had to write it on a typewriter. Since writers tend to make correc- Hanson has implied that mankind could be tions to their work (the real secret of good content with less technology than it now pos- writing is rewriting), this would have taken sesses and less production than it now gener- much longer, robbing him of leisure time. ates. But man is an inquisitive and striving Using the technology of Jefferson’s era, Han- animal, who thrives on challenge. Hanson son would have had to write with a quill pen says that we could be satisfied with lesser and an inkpot, robbing himself of even more abundance if we lowered our expectations. leisure time—which, as he points out, is one But the very fact that people have expecta- of the main components of happiness. This is tions means there will always be something not to say that he is a hypocrite, but only to that a person wants but does not have, or that point out that his anti-technological perspec- some kind of dissatisfaction will exist because tive blinds him from seeing how beneficial Wwe can never, in any age, attain all we might technology has been, even to him, and how it expect or hope to attain. Without this perpet- has enabled him to increase his satisfaction. ual (and perfectly normal) dissatisfaction with Even so, we cannot say that being able to the present state of affairs, there would have write articles more quickly and more easily been no reason for technology to have devel- would make a major contribution to a writer's oped. That's the key element Hanson has overall happiness. As Hanson himself pointed missed. When there is dissatisfaction or an out, our sense of contentment and satisfaction unfulfilled need, entrepreneurs appear. Their is not a mere function of what we achieve; it usefulness lies in their ability to innovate and depends on our frame of reference—on how to offer solutions that people are willing to “what we attain compares to what we expect- buy because these solutions increase specific ed.” Indeed, every age has its own expecta- satisfactions or reduce some specific dissatis- tions, and there were certainly happy people factions. during the pre-technological Dark Ages (such Iron is too brittle, so steel was invented. as Robin Hood and his “Merry Men”), justas Horses are slow and litter the streets with there are today. disease-generating droppings, so steam and Friar Tuck and Will Scarlet would not be then gasoline engines were invented. unhappy simply because they did not pos- Telegraphed messages gave way to telephone sess radios, televisions, or sports cars. They calls. Index-card files are cumbersome, so had no conception of such things. Moreover, computers were invented. Thus, the fact that their band of outlaws provided them with a the percentage of Americans who claim to be network of close friends on whom they very happy is no larger now than it was could depend for good humor, camaraderie, decades ago is not a valid argument against and moral support. But just because they technology and material abundance, which were capable of happiness without such exist to meet specific needs, not to produce modern conveniences, it does not mean that general happiness. One question that the they would have rejected them if they had polltakers mentioned by Hanson apparently learned of their existence; nor does it mean did not ask, but perhaps should have asked that they would derive no satisfaction from (at least, for Hanson’s own enlightenment) these devices had they had them. If Robin is: “Would you be happier or sadder if you Hood could warn Little John of the Sheriff had to live without modern conveniences?” of Nottingham’s approach by radio or tele- phone, it could result in saving the lives of many of his Merry Men. It would be hard to imagine him thinking that such a device was Since Hanson was careful to point out that anything but a great boon. And if his men satisfaction with family life (especially mar- had been equipped with motorcycles instead riage) is a key component of happiness, those of horses. . . . of us who support technological growth Technology and Leisure ===== PAGE 9 ===== TECHNOLOGY AND HAPPINESS 457 should also be careful to point out the benefi- and speculating about the unknown. Conse- cial role that technology has played in pre- quently, science developed and made slow serving this happiness. Before modern tech- progress, and from it grew the technology nology arrived, a woman would typically have that Hanson so deplores. Do not scientists, eight or ten children, for two reasons: first, so inventors, and philosophers obtain happiness that two or three of them, with luck, would from gaining knowledge and making discov- actually survive past childhood; second, eries? Are not others made happier when they because no effective birth-control method hear that this has occurred, and that existed. Progress in medicine and disease-pre- mankind’s knowledge and understanding of vention—made possible by technological the universe have been increased? Certainly advancements—changed all this. Technology this is so. We will probably never understand also made mom’s life easier by producing the universe completely, but each step in that dishwashers, vacuum cleaners, clothes wash- direction is a triumph that all can share. It ers and dryers, microwave ovens, and many may not make a sad person happy, but other household gadgets. If these things did mankind does not pursue knowledge to make not necessarily ensure her happiness, they at sad people happy. The pursuit of knowledge least did not make her any sadder. In fact, is itself a source of satisfaction, if not of hap- since Hanson clearly states that leisure time is piness, and that is sufficient. a prime component of happiness, we can Hanson's chief error is to ascribe to tech- assume that by his own definition, such labor- nology and affluence an exclusive moral saving devices must have made mom happier. responsibility for producing general happi- Similarly, the unhappiness a husband would ness that they simply do not bear. To draw a experience from watching his wife die in parallel, suppose a cultural Philistine had childbirth is a less-frequent occurrence now examined the same opinion polls that Hanson because of technological and medical had seen, and concluded that even though the advances. The same can be said for the death world possesses many more books and works of a parent, which is now delayed by many of art now than it did fifty or a hundred years years due to the same scientific attainments. ago, people are neither more happy nor more Perhaps losing relatives to fire is even more aesthetically advanced now than they were terrifying and grief-generating than losing then. So it must have been art and literature them to natural causes. Before technology that have failed us! Should this inspire us to gave us electric lighting, house fires were a say that writers, playwrights, and artists constant danger because at first interiors were should restrict their output? lit with candles and then by oil or kerosene Hanson should restrict his efforts to lamps, which were always fire hazards. Histo- cultivating his own happiness, and stop trying ry books do not tell us that half of Chicago to decide—based on mere circumstantial was burned to a crisp in 1871, with great loss evidence—what makes others happy. As of life, because Mrs. O’Leary’s cow kicked an implied by the old adage, “What is one man’s electric light bulb out of its socket. meat is another man’s poison,” this is for each individual to decide. OJ Discovery Is Destiny 1. Web address: http://www.livelinks.com/sumeria/politics/ enviro.html. (Accessed March 6, 1998.) : 2. 1 particularly recommend Eco-Sanity by Joseph L. Bast, et al. Hanson 15 probably gware of such facts, (Lanham, Md.: Madison Books, 1994); Environmental Overkill: but his perspective drives him to reject pro- Whatever Happened to Common Sense? by Dixy Lee Ray (New : : York: Harper Perennial, 1993); Green Delusions by Martin W. duction and technology because happiness, Lewis (Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press, 1992); No Turning he claims, does not consist of “having.” But Back by Wallace Kaufman (New York: Basic Books, 1994); and Sci- : : : : ence Under Siege by Michael Fumento (New York: William Morrow he should ask himself if any happiness ds ZC Tne, 1993), derived from knowing, or if ignorance is bliss 3. Albert O. Hirschman, Shifting Involvements (Princeton, N.J.: 3 : : : Princeton University Press, 1982), pp. 50-53. instead. The human Species 15 a curlous one, 4. George Lichtheim, A Short History of Socialism (New York: always asking questions, wondering “why,” Praeger Publishers, 1970), p. 327. ===== PAGE 10 ===== Anything That's Peaceful How to Get Action by Leonard E. Read want less talk and more action.” action, in their calculations, by not even con- Thus speak Americans when they sud- templating it. Thus, according to their own denly awaken to the fact that their liberties are thesis, nothing logically remains but intellec- endangered. Talk, they say, is useless; only tual action. action counts. But perhaps talk and action aren’t necessarily opposites. What if studying, talking, writing, and explaining should turn out to be the only worthwhile action there is? How, then, does one fight for liberty intel- What then? lectually? The best thing to do even in an There are only two types of action: physi- intellectual fight for liberty, many think, is to cal and intellectual. Do those who would organize—which is a form of action. Usually save liberty advocate physical action? If so, they think in terms of organizing someone how? To use physical force against others, else to do something instead of organizing except defensively, is to destroy the liberty their own time and energies. This damaging of others which, by definition, is not liberty. tactic is employed as though organizing had To adopt this tactic—to employ physical the power, somehow, to absolve individuals force against others in any form or degree, from doing any more than joining some orga- except in self-defense—would be merely to nization. This mania for organizing is usually substitute a new form of compulsion for the little more than an effort, doubtless unwitting, existing forms of compulsion, trading vio- to transfer responsibility from oneself to some lence for violence—revolution! At best, it is other person or persons whose competence is the court of last resort and is not, really, what often unknown. : most persons have in mind when they insist Responsibility and authority always go they want action. Most of them mean only hand in hand. Thus, if this process of orga- that they want “something done,” and quick- nizing succeeds, authority over one’s own ly! They want to fight peacefully. The actions is lost precisely in the degree that thought of using fists or guns never as much responsibility is shifted to someone else. The as enters their heads; they reject physical citizen who “wants action,” and resorts to this type of tactic, ends up further from his - goal than ever. In fact, organizing, more Leonard E. Read established FEE in 1946 and served often than not, is merely an attempt to “pass as its president until his death in 1983. This article » is excerpted from Essays on Liberty, Vol. III (1958), the buck. Xe oddly enough the mere oo pp. 102-109. 1t is the eighth in a monthly series com- © ve ge powe T memorating the 100th anniversary of Mr. Read’s Ting a sense of accomplishment on the ones birth. who organize. 458 The Mania for Organizing ===== PAGE 11 ===== 459 Organization, though much used, seems to of man has to offer. Its distortion, inevitable be little understood. In the field of extending when achieving a collective chorus, does individual liberty, organization has strictly injury to understanding. limited, technical possibilities. Unless these limitations are scrupulously observed, organi- zation will inflict on liberty more harm than good; thwart, not abet, the spread of under- If organization is not the best way to secure standing. Sobering is the thought that if there liberty, then what is? My answer—self- were no organization, there could be no improvement—is the essence of simplicity. socialism! . . . The reasons which lie behind the answer, however, are not so simple. The inclination to escape personal respon- sibility—plus the belief that somehow intel- Organizations can, however, serve a highly lectual miracles can be wrought by us on useful purpose in developing and spreading someone else—is too pervasive for easy an understanding of liberty if organization is rejection. Unless we fully understand that confined to its proper sphere. For the purpose these inclinations and beliefs are wholly with- of advancing liberty, which depends solely on out merit, we will continue to indulge in them. the advancement of individual understanding, I wish to make the argument that self- the only usefulness of organization would improvement is the only practical course to seem to be to accommodate and to make eas- liberty. ier the joint contribution to, participation in, Is there one book or one article written by and ownership of the physical assets that will anyone at any time that can be designated as aid in the process. These physical assets may the final word on liberty? Perhaps the best that include typewriters, buildings, specialized can be said is that the finest minds of all time libraries, printing presses, telephones, and the have been in pursuit of its understanding and many other tools helpful to individuals who that now and then a tiny ray of new light has are attempting to extend their understanding been thrown on what theretofore was dark- of liberty. These physical accommodations ness and lack of understanding. These few can enable searchers for truth to exchange and most advanced searchers have been among disseminate ideas and knowledge more effec- the first to say, “The more exploration I do, tively. They can be used to secure the advan- the more I find there is to learn.” tages which derive from specialization or The reason for this difficulty in understand- division of labor. Organization, limited to this ing liberty is that liberty, like truth, is an form of voluntary cooperation, is a useful and object of infinite pursuit, a quest without end, efficient means for achieving these desirable ever! The understanding of liberty requires ends. intellectual ventures into the areas of the Organization, however, like government, unknown or, more likely, into the areas that if extended beyond its proper sphere, have become unknown or that majorities have becomes positively harmful to the original declared taboo. Have you not noticed the purpose. This fact constitutes the need for vigor we employ when a present liberty is much careful thought on organizational lim- threatened and then, when it is lost, how soon itation. Just as government becomes danger- we refer to it as a “social gain”? How can one ous when its coercive, restrictive, and who has been thus trapped, or who himself destructive powers are extended into the cre- has lapsed into thinking of a new restraint as ative areas, so do voluntary organizations a “social gain,” possibly identify the liberties pervert and destroy the benefits of intellect he has lost? when the capacity to merge is carried to the Every individual ought to realize that he point of subjecting individual judgments to has not mastered the subject of liberty until he the will of the majority or group. Truth, as thoroughly understands, and can competently each person sees it, is the best that the mind explain, this idea: With government properly Try Self-Improvement For Voluntary Cooperation ===== PAGE 12 ===== 460 THE FREEMAN e AUGUST 1998 limited to its legitimate functions of defense, eventual harvest of peace. Much of this our problems of interdependence can be seed would be squandered. Some of it resolved through voluntary effort, and only would fall among weeds and brambles through voluntary effort. If that is a correct where it would have no chance at all to appraisal, then most persons are inexpert in grow, but the sower could not pause or look their understanding of this subject. back to lament this extravagance. Some of In brief, not a single person among us is the seed would fall upon stony ground justified in regarding himself other than as a where there was very little soil to nourish it student of liberty. No know-it-all exists or and the tender plants would soon wither ever will. and die; but the sower must not be dis- In searching for a student of liberty, the mayed. Some of the life-giving grain search must be within oneself. In the world of would grow! Some of it would find friend- persons, it is only within each of us that the ly lodging in fertile ground!! fertile, explorable areas exist. The best explor- er of oneself is oneself. It is not possible to The Only Practical Action impart to others that which we do not possess. And even after we have made some progress Action? The casual thinker might imagine in understanding, the most we can do for oth- that the best course is to try to tell others what ers is to make known to them a willingness to to do and how to think. But reason supplies a share what we have discovered by our own contrary answer. It suggests that pursuit of thinking, or what we find edifying from one’s own personal understanding is the only recorded thinking. Whether or not what we practical action for one to take. If a person offer is, in fact, shared, is beyond our power; advances his own understanding of the true and and we should realize this. the false, the understanding thus acquired will It is conceded that the student attitude, this be sought by others. Reason recommends that search within ourselves, may at times appear a person get the horse before the cart; that first unrewarding. But if the understanding of lib- one must learn; that influencing others will erty is to be advanced, the attempt must be take care of itself. Reason says that influence in persisted in, regardless of its seeming extrav- the creative areas can have no effectiveness agance in time and effort. prior to learning; that learning has no end. Along this line, a fictional statement Some persons will assert that the conclu- ascribed to Christ is heartening if one will sions herein set forth are self-evident, but will think of him in the symbolic terms of truth argue that this suggested student approach— and infinite goodness, and of our own weak- this process of self-improvement—is too slow ness and inabilities as weeds and brambles; to meet the challenge of these times. and of our own rare virtues and abilities as I am in no position to deny this. But, in my fertile ground: opinion, there is no shortcut. The only way to truth—that is, to understanding—is through Presently the Master appeared on the steps ON€’s own person. When we gain an apprecia- was immediately obvious that he had been to as little violence against persons, and thus aware of the rudeness of the crowd—and to as much liberty among persons, as is with- deplored it. He had been appointed, he In our power to bring about. said, to offer a way of salvation to the Action? For authoritarians it is physical world; and that meant everybody. In a task force. For libertarians it is first understanding so great as this, no prudent thought could and then explanation—the latter being “talk,” be taken about the cost of it or the waste of either verbal or written. Ol it. His mission, he said, was to sow the seed I. Lloyd C. Douglas, The Big Fisherman, Houghton Mifflin, of good will among men in the hope of an 1948, p. 377. ===== PAGE 13 ===== FREEMAN deas On Libert How Environmentalism Disdains the Poor by E. Calvin Beisner he late Julian Simon and other wise capita was only about a tenth of Latin Ameri- thinkers have long understood that eco- ca’s average, and less than one-eightieth that nomic development is necessary to enable of the United States; its under-five mortality people to afford a safe environment. That rate was more than twice Latin America’s and insight fits in with my own observations almost ten times the United States’; and its when, several years ago, I attended the average life expectancy at birth was 12 per- Oxford Conference on Christian Faith and cent lower than Latin America’s and 20 per- Economics at Agra, India—