WEBVTT

NOTE Classical Liberalism

1
00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:07.000
This afternoon's lecture will concern classical liberalism itself.

2
00:00:07.000 --> 00:00:17.000
Now, either I think that you've been given free of charge in the usual generous tradition of the Mises Institute

3
00:00:17.000 --> 00:00:25.000
or somewhere along the line gotten a hold of a copy of Mises' book called Liberalism.

4
00:00:25.000 --> 00:00:34.000
in the original German, called just liberalism, in the current English version, liberalism in the classical tradition.

5
00:00:34.000 --> 00:00:46.000
This was translated from German in a really rather brilliant translation, compared by many to Chapman's Homer.

6
00:00:46.000 --> 00:00:53.000
And at the very beginning of the book, Mises talks about liberalism and says,

7
00:00:53.000 --> 00:00:58.560
Philosophers, sociologists and economists of the 18th and early part of the 19th century

8
00:00:58.560 --> 00:01:03.120
formulated a political program that served as a guide to social policy, first in England

9
00:01:03.120 --> 00:01:07.520
and the United States, then on the European continent, and finally in the rest of the

10
00:01:07.520 --> 00:01:14.520
world. This program was nowhere ever carried out in full, even in England, the homeland

11
00:01:14.520 --> 00:01:21.520
of liberalism. It says liberalism was never permitted to come to full fruition. Nevertheless,

12
00:01:23.000 --> 00:01:28.440
As brief and all too limited as the supremacy of liberal ideas was, it sufficed to change

13
00:01:28.440 --> 00:01:34.440
the face of the earth and goes on in that vein.

14
00:01:34.440 --> 00:01:41.960
Well, as I say, he uses the term liberalism, which for a long time was the word associated

15
00:01:41.960 --> 00:01:49.280
with this program that he's developing, but it may seem strange to you to associate liberalism

16
00:01:49.280 --> 00:01:58.120
with Laissez-Faire and the Liberal Program considering that liberalism, and not only

17
00:01:58.120 --> 00:02:04.200
in the United States, now in other countries as well, has come to mean something quite

18
00:02:04.200 --> 00:02:05.200
different.

19
00:02:05.200 --> 00:02:12.160
It is a rather well-known story how, in English-speaking countries first of all, and then elsewhere

20
00:02:12.160 --> 00:02:18.640
Around the turn of the century, that is the turn of the 19th into the 20th century, the

21
00:02:18.640 --> 00:02:24.800
term liberal was hijacked by people who were essentially social democrats.

22
00:02:24.800 --> 00:02:31.480
Joseph Schumpeter, and Schumpeter was an economist from Austria, though not what we would call

23
00:02:31.480 --> 00:02:44.320
a very famous social philosopher, well worth consulting, wrote a very big book that I think

24
00:02:44.320 --> 00:02:50.320
is still in print from Oxford called History of Economic Analysis and in the famous passage

25
00:02:50.320 --> 00:02:57.840
there, he ironically states that it was a kind of compliment if an unintended one, when

26
00:02:57.840 --> 00:03:03.280
And the enemies of the system of free enterprise confiscated the name liberal for what was

27
00:03:03.280 --> 00:03:10.440
basically the opposite of what liberalism had stood for from the start.

28
00:03:10.440 --> 00:03:16.880
And nowadays you can find writers, I swear, who express astonishment that free market

29
00:03:16.880 --> 00:03:26.240
economists still sometimes insist on calling themselves liberals rather than conservatives.

30
00:03:26.240 --> 00:03:36.240
Some might say, why argue over a name, why not just call your position anything at all and go on from there to argue the case for it.

31
00:03:36.240 --> 00:03:43.240
Stephen Holmes, a political scientist from Chicago, has called the dispute over the term liberal a matter of bragging rights.

32
00:03:43.240 --> 00:03:47.240
The right to brag, I'm the real liberal tradition and you're not.

33
00:03:47.240 --> 00:03:53.240
On the other hand, he insists that he's in the real liberal tradition and thinks it's worth arguing about.

34
00:03:53.240 --> 00:04:03.240
Seems to me there are good reasons to hold on to the name liberal from the point of view, say, of Ludwig von Mises and not of John Kenneth Galbraith.

35
00:04:03.240 --> 00:04:10.240
First, in order to preserve a conceptual coherence when dealing with intellectual history.

36
00:04:10.240 --> 00:04:17.240
How can you make sense of the history of ideas if you say there was an important school of thought called liberalism,

37
00:04:17.240 --> 00:04:31.240
and Kenneth Galbraith, John Maynard Keynes, John Rawls and Franklin Roosevelt are just as entitled to the name liberal as Mises, Hayek, Nozick and say Grover Cleveland.

38
00:04:31.240 --> 00:04:46.240
Second, there was demonstrably a very deliberate political aim when Hobhouse, Hobson, John Dewey and others, Germany Friedrich Naumann promoted the transformation of the term.

39
00:04:46.240 --> 00:04:55.240
There was a theory underlying the terminological change, a kind of ideological subtext, one might say, that is still operative.

40
00:04:55.240 --> 00:04:58.240
This is what the idea was.

41
00:04:58.240 --> 00:05:07.240
There was an old liberalism of laissez-faire that is now antiquated and obsolete, made so by massive changes in society.

42
00:05:07.240 --> 00:05:13.240
Those writers at the turn of the century who pioneered the new liberalism, as they sometimes called it,

43
00:05:13.240 --> 00:05:18.240
based their claims on a ridiculously inflated view of the power of business enterprise

44
00:05:18.240 --> 00:05:21.240
vis-a-vis the individual workers on the labor market

45
00:05:21.240 --> 00:05:29.240
and an equally inflated view of the business corporations alleged enormous power vis-a-vis the individual consumer.

46
00:05:29.240 --> 00:05:38.240
In any case, the hijacking of the term liberal imply that the old liberalism, liberalism of Mises, for instance, in his book

47
00:05:38.240 --> 00:05:43.740
was dead and certainly need not be considered a plausible candidate for support.

48
00:05:43.740 --> 00:05:52.240
Funny thing happened in this respect, funny relative to other things I might be saying this afternoon.

49
00:05:52.240 --> 00:05:59.740
And that is that after a while, some of the English old-fashioned liberals like Auburn Herbert

50
00:05:59.740 --> 00:06:05.240
and the extreme followers of Herbert Spencer and so on, started saying,

51
00:06:05.240 --> 00:06:10.240
Well, you know, let's call ourselves something else. Let's call ourselves individualists.

52
00:06:10.240 --> 00:06:16.240
Then, John Dewey, and I can cite chapter and verse for you, started saying,

53
00:06:16.240 --> 00:06:20.240
Well, you know, there was an old individualism that is now obsolete.

54
00:06:20.240 --> 00:06:25.240
The new individualism, which is the same thing as the new liberalism,

55
00:06:25.240 --> 00:06:31.240
calls on all of the powers of society to support the individual in his or her self-development

56
00:06:31.240 --> 00:06:36.920
and on and on and on in that vein.

57
00:06:36.920 --> 00:06:40.360
Finally, I submit that there is no intellectually honest reason

58
00:06:40.360 --> 00:06:44.760
to bestow the term liberal on those nowadays

59
00:06:44.760 --> 00:06:48.400
who favor a never-ending list of government-funded programs

60
00:06:48.400 --> 00:06:51.560
to deal with every real or imagined ill of society

61
00:06:51.560 --> 00:06:56.960
and who favor constantly expanding state apparatus

62
00:06:56.960 --> 00:07:01.240
to wage war on the traditional ways and values of civil society.

63
00:07:01.240 --> 00:07:05.680
Those are the people who are called liberal nowadays.

64
00:07:05.680 --> 00:07:08.920
Peculiarly enough, to complicate it even further,

65
00:07:08.920 --> 00:07:14.760
in some cases, the term liberal does retain its old meaning.

66
00:07:14.760 --> 00:07:23.080
In the case of France, for instance, which I know we all now agree with,

67
00:07:23.080 --> 00:07:30.120
Thomas Jefferson, who said that every man has two countries, his own in France.

68
00:07:30.120 --> 00:07:38.320
The term liberal or sometimes ultra-liberal means a believer in laissez-faire or an extreme believer in laissez-faire.

69
00:07:38.320 --> 00:07:49.040
So the French, unlike the English, the Americans, the Canadians, even the Germans to an extent, have preserved the older meaning.

70
00:07:49.040 --> 00:07:54.840
There is a name for the position that calls itself liberal or liberalism in these countries.

71
00:07:54.840 --> 00:07:59.740
It is called social democracy or democratic socialism.

72
00:07:59.740 --> 00:08:02.440
Perfectly legitimate names.

73
00:08:02.440 --> 00:08:05.840
Why do they want to take over the name liberal?

74
00:08:05.840 --> 00:08:09.840
The rationale of Hobhouse, Hobson and the others for their new liberalism

75
00:08:09.840 --> 00:08:14.840
is indistinguishable from the position, for instance, of Edward Bernstein,

76
00:08:14.840 --> 00:08:18.240
the founder of revisionist socialism in Germany,

77
00:08:18.240 --> 00:08:22.440
which has today become socialism all together in the modern world

78
00:08:22.440 --> 00:08:26.360
just as the position of American liberal intellectuals

79
00:08:26.360 --> 00:08:32.080
is indistinguishable from that of people who call themselves social democrats in Europe

80
00:08:32.080 --> 00:08:36.440
this is what Edward Bernstein said around 1920 or so

81
00:08:36.440 --> 00:08:41.680
the development and protection of the free personality is the goal of all socialist measures

82
00:08:41.680 --> 00:08:46.360
even of those which superficially appear to be coercive measures

83
00:08:46.360 --> 00:08:52.400
A closer examination will always show that it is a question of a coercion that increases

84
00:08:52.400 --> 00:08:57.720
the sum of freedom in society that gives more freedom into a wider group than it takes away.

85
00:08:57.720 --> 00:09:04.280
Now, I submit that this is what so-called liberals in America hold, that, yeah, we have

86
00:09:04.280 --> 00:09:10.520
to be coercive in this respect, forcing employers to behave in this way, forcing consumers to

87
00:09:10.520 --> 00:09:14.720
behave in this way, indoctrinating children in the public schools in this way, in order

88
00:09:14.720 --> 00:09:19.280
to promote a greater freedom and the total development of the human personality. Fine

89
00:09:19.280 --> 00:09:24.540
if that's what you believe. But Bernstein never called himself a liberal. He was a socialist.

90
00:09:24.540 --> 00:09:29.520
And he said that this is the socialist vision.

91
00:09:29.520 --> 00:09:35.340
Why in English speaking countries democratic socialists should shy away from calling themselves

92
00:09:35.340 --> 00:09:41.820
by their proper name is a matter of political expediency more than anything else. For some

93
00:09:41.820 --> 00:09:47.140
Some reason or other, political labels suggestive of socialism have not been very popular in

94
00:09:47.140 --> 00:09:52.620
countries of the English heritage, so that what is essentially a social democratic party

95
00:09:52.620 --> 00:10:00.300
in the United States, the democrats, or the people who call themselves liberals in Canada,

96
00:10:00.300 --> 00:10:10.300
or the labor party, or even the liberal social democrats in England call themselves liberals.

97
00:10:10.300 --> 00:10:15.980
Now it is sometimes maintained that underlying liberalism is a particular philosophical system,

98
00:10:15.980 --> 00:10:20.500
in the sense of a particular metaphysics and epistemology.

99
00:10:20.500 --> 00:10:26.980
Often this philosophical system is taken to be British empiricism from John Locke to Mill,

100
00:10:26.980 --> 00:10:29.700
but I don't find this satisfactory.

101
00:10:29.700 --> 00:10:34.640
There are simply too many divergent and conflicting philosophical traditions within the history

102
00:10:34.640 --> 00:10:42.200
of Liberalism, from Aristotelianism and Thomism, to Kantianism, to empiricism, and so on for

103
00:10:42.200 --> 00:10:45.000
this to be convincing.

104
00:10:45.000 --> 00:10:49.800
The working definition of liberalism that I will adopt is this, it is the ideology that

105
00:10:49.800 --> 00:10:57.920
holds that civil society, understood as the sum order of society, the sum of the social

106
00:10:57.920 --> 00:11:07.920
Social order minus the state by and large runs itself within the bounds of the principle of private property.

107
00:11:07.920 --> 00:11:25.920
So liberalism, as I'll be discussing it, is this. It believes that civil society, understood as the social order minus the state, by and large runs itself within the bounds of the principle of private property.

108
00:11:25.920 --> 00:11:40.920
Well, with the collapse of Marxism, especially, real existing socialist regimes, and Marxism, especially, liberalism has become enormously popular.

109
00:11:40.920 --> 00:11:45.920
It seems that everybody wants to call himself a liberal.

110
00:11:45.920 --> 00:11:53.920
And this reflects itself in the scholarly world. There's much more attention being paid to liberalism than there ever was before.

111
00:11:53.920 --> 00:12:05.920
Scholars appear to be waking up to a few facts, after decades concentrating on the history of socialism, especially of Marxism,

112
00:12:05.920 --> 00:12:13.920
after having examined over and over again in mind-numbing detail the minutia of the annals of socialist doctrine and agitation,

113
00:12:13.920 --> 00:12:27.920
They have finally, academics have finally woken up to the fact that the foundations of our own society are worthy of attention as much as the sterile dreams of socialist visionaries.

114
00:12:27.920 --> 00:12:30.920
That is certainly a hopeful sign.

115
00:12:30.920 --> 00:12:38.920
Well, let's take up the story where I more or less left it off last time, the end of the Middle Ages.

116
00:12:38.920 --> 00:12:53.920
And the first thing we might mention is the Renaissance. Often, especially in older histories of the liberal idea, a lot of attention was devoted to the Renaissance.

117
00:12:53.920 --> 00:13:07.920
There was even a certain novelist, well known in American libertarian circles, whose philosophy of history can be encapsulated as, first came Aristotle, then the Renaissance, and then came the railroads.

118
00:13:07.920 --> 00:13:23.920
I must confess that I am dubious of the contribution of the Renaissance in general and especially of Renaissance philosophy as it is ordinarily understood to the rise of liberalism.

119
00:13:23.920 --> 00:13:33.920
It used to be that great stress was placed on writers like Marsilio Ficino and Pico della Mirandola, Pico's famous oration on the dignity of man,

120
00:13:33.920 --> 00:13:45.920
God hails man as the maker and molder of thyself, who are free to fashion thyself in whatever shape thou shalt prefer.

121
00:13:45.920 --> 00:13:53.920
Well, this has more in common, it seems to me, with Marx's Promethean vision of man than it does with the liberal tradition,

122
00:13:53.920 --> 00:14:01.920
which has usually been based in one way or another on the view of a given nature of man as attainable by reason.

123
00:14:01.920 --> 00:14:13.920
And, as Acton, of course, who very much valued the Middle Ages, pointed out, the great political philosopher of the Italian Renaissance is Machiavelli.

124
00:14:13.920 --> 00:14:23.920
The contrast between the Middle Ages and the Renaissance can be illustrated by the example of what is sometimes called the School of Salamanca.

125
00:14:23.920 --> 00:14:29.920
Not entirely correctly, because it includes Spanish thinkers not connected with the University of Salamanca.

126
00:14:29.920 --> 00:14:34.360
and it also includes some Italian and Portuguese thinkers.

127
00:14:34.360 --> 00:14:38.360
These are better referred to as the late scholastics.

128
00:14:38.360 --> 00:14:47.480
Now, I don't know how far your own book budget can be stretched.

129
00:14:47.480 --> 00:14:53.840
I suppose if it's necessary you could photocopy, whatever, 1200 pages and save yourself 90

130
00:14:53.840 --> 00:14:59.860
or 100 dollars, but maybe, as a matter of fact, you'd be able to get it used from Amazon.

131
00:14:59.860 --> 00:15:05.220
This is the History of Economic Thought in two volumes by Murray Rothbard.

132
00:15:05.220 --> 00:15:06.620
You're probably familiar with it.

133
00:15:06.620 --> 00:15:18.740
In any case, while you're here, you can consult the copies that are available at the Institute.

134
00:15:18.740 --> 00:15:20.740
It was Murray's last book.

135
00:15:20.740 --> 00:15:23.060
I never completed it.

136
00:15:23.060 --> 00:15:26.780
Never got into the Austrian School itself or the 20th century, which he'd planned to

137
00:15:26.780 --> 00:15:27.860
do.

138
00:15:27.860 --> 00:15:35.860
But still, as it stands, it's a magnificent work of scholarship, liberal education in itself, in my view.

139
00:15:35.860 --> 00:15:42.860
And Murray has an important chapter in the first volume of his book on the late scholastics,

140
00:15:42.860 --> 00:15:46.860
the so-called School of Salamanca and the others.

141
00:15:46.860 --> 00:15:51.860
The story of these writers is another example of anti-Catholic bias.

142
00:15:51.860 --> 00:15:54.860
They were consistently ignored or downplayed,

143
00:15:54.860 --> 00:16:03.760
And it was a conventional wisdom that the traditional Catholic position on economics was based on the prohibition of usury and the just price.

144
00:16:03.760 --> 00:16:13.520
In other words, a kind of reactionary, medieval view that runs totally contrary to basic economic thinking.

145
00:16:13.520 --> 00:16:18.360
This was the older view, and this is maybe the view that's come down to you.

146
00:16:18.360 --> 00:16:25.160
Then in the 1950s, Marjorie Grice Hutchinson, who I think just recently died, and Raymond

147
00:16:25.160 --> 00:16:30.760
de Ruver, a professor in New York, published books and articles that began to do justice

148
00:16:30.760 --> 00:16:35.840
to these remarkable thinkers. A good study of them is short, and a good study of them

149
00:16:35.840 --> 00:16:46.040
is by a friend of ours, Alexander or Alex Scheffwan, who is the president of the Atlas

150
00:16:46.040 --> 00:16:56.160
Foundations, in Fairfax, a book called Christians for Freedom. Now, briefly, these writers,

151
00:16:56.160 --> 00:17:04.720
and they include Luis de Molina, Juan de Mariana, Francisco de Vitoria, Suarez, and the others,

152
00:17:04.720 --> 00:17:11.720
presented a sophisticated analysis of many economic phenomena, starting off as a baseline

153
00:17:11.720 --> 00:17:18.600
with a subjective theory of value as based on utility as understood by the economic actor.

154
00:17:18.600 --> 00:17:24.000
Now, if you think about that a minute, this already, we're talking about the 15th century

155
00:17:24.000 --> 00:17:31.320
and in the case of some Italians, the late 15th century, basically the 16th century, early 17th century

156
00:17:31.320 --> 00:17:41.680
and already we have the germ of the modern theory of value that has nothing to do with the English schools

157
00:17:41.680 --> 00:17:49.040
theory of value based on labor, famous theory of value that became standard in Britain

158
00:17:49.040 --> 00:17:55.040
with Ricardo and then was accepted by Karl Marx. This is a totally different tradition and Murray

159
00:17:55.040 --> 00:18:01.840
emphasizes throughout his history of economic thought how this Iberian tradition then becomes

160
00:18:01.840 --> 00:18:08.480
the standard European tradition and Italian economic thought and especially in French economic

161
00:18:08.480 --> 00:18:12.480
in sharp contrast to what's happening in Britain.

162
00:18:12.480 --> 00:18:18.480
Economics and economic phenomena based then on a subjective theory of value,

163
00:18:18.480 --> 00:18:26.480
on the individual actor's sense of utility as against some so-called objective theory of value based on labor input.

164
00:18:26.480 --> 00:18:33.480
These writers maintained the legitimacy of private property.

165
00:18:33.480 --> 00:18:41.480
They were for low taxes and against using taxation for the redistribution of wealth, and they opposed the debasement of money.

166
00:18:41.480 --> 00:18:53.480
Most of them were Spaniards who lived at the time of the Spanish conquest of the New World and the influx of precious metals into Europe, which created a precious metals inflation.

167
00:18:53.480 --> 00:18:58.480
They were very sensitive to the issue of inflation and the debasement of money.

168
00:18:58.480 --> 00:19:08.480
The Mises Institute has a number of economists who know many, many times more about these issues than I do,

169
00:19:08.480 --> 00:19:17.480
but according to them, according to Murray, very sophisticated analysis of how inflation works.

170
00:19:17.480 --> 00:19:23.480
Here's one of the writers, the origin of poverty is high taxes.

171
00:19:23.480 --> 00:19:31.480
In continual fear of tax collectors, the farmers prefer to abandon their land so they can escape their vexations.

172
00:19:31.480 --> 00:19:33.480
That was the story of the late Roman Empire.

173
00:19:33.480 --> 00:19:44.480
In order to flee the tax collector, they simply fled the towns and went to put themselves into some local landlord,

174
00:19:44.480 --> 00:19:55.480
The landlord, as part of his clientele, set up little villages of their own because taxation had become so onerous.

175
00:19:55.480 --> 00:20:04.480
And what that man is saying, by the way, and I think that's Molina who says that, he says that's happening in Castile.

176
00:20:04.480 --> 00:20:15.480
Castillo was a very well developed, that is the heart of Spain, a very well developed part of Europe in the later Middle Ages.

177
00:20:15.480 --> 00:20:30.480
And what happened, again, because of their imperialism and their religious intolerance, the Spanish Habsburgs were able to impoverish Spain while they had their high taxes.

178
00:20:30.480 --> 00:20:34.600
In the course of that, by the way, they had to fight it out with Cortes, this medieval

179
00:20:34.600 --> 00:20:39.120
institution, and it actually came to battles between the Spanish towns and the Spanish

180
00:20:39.120 --> 00:20:48.260
crown where the towns were defeated. Cortes was rendered impotent, and then the Spanish

181
00:20:48.260 --> 00:20:55.480
kings could do anything that they wanted, and with time, Spain turned into what it became,

182
00:20:55.480 --> 00:21:08.160
The backwoods of Europe, the decadent power which had once been rich and powerful.

183
00:21:08.160 --> 00:21:13.880
Another writer, Villalobos, taxes severely weakened towns and impoverished farmers.

184
00:21:13.880 --> 00:21:18.760
We can see places which yesterday were flourishing and had many inhabitants and now lie fallow

185
00:21:18.760 --> 00:21:19.760
because of high taxes.

186
00:21:19.760 --> 00:21:22.760
By the way, all of these men were clerics.

187
00:21:22.760 --> 00:21:48.520
were monks or priests and I think it's clear that part of their concern here is the duty that such a person felt or a high-minded person of that calling felt towards the poor and towards productive working people that hear their suffering because of the bad policies of their rulers.

188
00:21:48.520 --> 00:21:50.560
Here's Albornoz,

189
00:21:50.560 --> 00:21:55.120
Buying and selling is the nerve of human life that sustains the universe.

190
00:21:55.120 --> 00:21:56.680
Sounds like Bastiat.

191
00:21:56.680 --> 00:21:59.580
By means of buying and selling the world is united,

192
00:21:59.580 --> 00:22:04.600
joining distant lands and nations, people of different languages, laws and ways of life.

193
00:22:04.600 --> 00:22:10.560
And that, you know, was part of the kind of, you could say, philosophical undergirding of the free trade position

194
00:22:10.560 --> 00:22:12.320
from the eighteenth century on.

195
00:22:12.320 --> 00:22:16.400
If you were of a religious mind, one of the things that occurred to you was that

196
00:22:16.400 --> 00:22:23.960
The earth is given differential resources, different climates, and so on, in order for

197
00:22:23.960 --> 00:22:28.160
the peoples to trade with one another, and in this way, it's a providential fact, in

198
00:22:28.160 --> 00:22:32.480
this way brought together in a universal harmony.

199
00:22:32.480 --> 00:22:41.240
The rule, of course, is late scholastics follower of Thomas Aquinas, who had written, any exchange

200
00:22:41.240 --> 00:22:45.800
is for the mutual benefit of both parties, with the result that they are better off than

201
00:22:45.800 --> 00:23:02.800
How long it took British political economy to learn this, when their idea was that exchange was an exchange of equal values, as if people sat around trading dollar bills with each other.

202
00:23:02.800 --> 00:23:11.800
In order for an exchange to take place, the two parties have to have a differential valuation of what is exchanged.

203
00:23:11.800 --> 00:23:31.800
and many other quotations along these lines could be queried and I suggest Alex Chevron's book, which I'm pretty sure is in the library here, as a kind of small compendium of many of these ideas.

204
00:23:31.800 --> 00:23:43.880
Well that Spanish or late scholastic school went into oblivion although with

205
00:23:43.880 --> 00:23:48.040
some of them Suarez was the most famous but Vitoria also and so on everybody

206
00:23:48.040 --> 00:23:51.360
admitted that they had a tremendous influence in their political theory on

207
00:23:51.360 --> 00:23:56.740
the line of Pufendorf and Grotius that winds up with John Locke everybody

208
00:23:56.740 --> 00:24:26.740
Now, the Dutch, interestingly enough, did produce a very close approximation of free society in the context of Europe of the time, but as far as I've been able to find out, not very much in the way of a political philosophy, but in the context of what I've been able to find out, not very much in the way of a political philosophy, but as far as I've been able to find out,

209
00:24:26.740 --> 00:24:30.740
that mirrored that freer kind of society.

210
00:24:30.740 --> 00:24:34.740
But I don't know what to say about this.

211
00:24:34.740 --> 00:24:40.740
Those of you who are not English-speaking, who don't come from English-speaking countries,

212
00:24:40.740 --> 00:24:49.740
I would urge you, as I do from time to time when I speak in European contexts,

213
00:24:49.740 --> 00:24:57.940
Please, you are able to easily read your own language, whatever it is, French or Italian

214
00:24:57.940 --> 00:25:03.860
or Danish or in this case Dutch, in a way that foreigners can, the way that I certainly

215
00:25:03.860 --> 00:25:10.100
can, simply skimming the literature.

216
00:25:10.100 --> 00:25:11.100
Delve into it.

217
00:25:11.100 --> 00:25:16.340
Find out who in the history of your own country was responsible for the free institutions

218
00:25:16.340 --> 00:25:18.340
that your people adopted.

219
00:25:18.340 --> 00:25:37.340
I remember in Copenhagen, talking to Per before, there's a statue, a monument, a small monument, very centrally placed, that I took a photograph of, on the emancipation of the Danish serfs.

220
00:25:37.340 --> 00:25:45.340
Well, I mean, that happened at a certain point. Somebody was responsible for that. What's the story behind that?

221
00:25:45.340 --> 00:25:53.540
As far as the French go, the greatest collection of free market thinking is contained in the

222
00:25:53.540 --> 00:26:02.140
Journal des Economistes, not the current one, but the older one, that began in 1846 or so,

223
00:26:02.140 --> 00:26:12.940
Joe, does that sound right? 1846, and lasted until June of 1940, when it was put a very

224
00:26:12.940 --> 00:26:20.840
Sudden End II by a certain occupying power that I'm not going to mention because Daniel

225
00:26:20.840 --> 00:26:27.880
is here, who closed down this great flagship of laissez-faire liberalism that had lasted

226
00:26:27.880 --> 00:26:33.820
for so long, almost a hundred years. Volume after volume, good old University of Chicago

227
00:26:33.820 --> 00:26:40.820
still has it in the hard copy, one volume after the other. At the Library of Congress

228
00:26:40.820 --> 00:26:57.820
In this case, it's in microfilm, and I think most places microfilm, but nonetheless, there are a number of different articles that could be mined from these doctoral dissertations by anybody who's very adept at the French language, and this goes also for Spaniards.

229
00:26:57.820 --> 00:27:26.580
The history of liberalism begins with the Levellers in the mid-17th century, one of Joe Stromberg's favorite

230
00:27:26.580 --> 00:27:31.140
One of Joe Stromberg's favorite groups also.

231
00:27:31.140 --> 00:27:40.660
And since they are an authentic product of the great English people, we will spell their

232
00:27:40.660 --> 00:27:52.700
name with the double L, which your spell check would reject if you're an American, the Levellers.

233
00:27:52.700 --> 00:28:00.940
Now, I mentioned that the attack on the traditional, inherited, chartered immunities and privileges

234
00:28:00.940 --> 00:28:08.540
of the Dutch people by the Spanish Habsburgs was the occasion for the revolt of the Dutch.

235
00:28:08.540 --> 00:28:15.300
In a parallel kind of way, at the beginning of the 17th century, a family, a dynasty comes

236
00:28:15.300 --> 00:28:19.500
to the throne of England that has similar absolutist ideas.

237
00:28:19.500 --> 00:28:44.500
You have to understand that the time we're talking about monarchical absolutism, the idea that the king owns the country, as Louis XIV thought, or stated at least, the idea that the king is above the law and so on, the idea that the country should be run by the king and his bureaucracy and his paid military mercenaries, this was considered the wave of the future.

238
00:28:44.500 --> 00:28:53.500
Just as, believe it or not, for a time in the late 20s and 1930s, fascism was considered a wave of the future.

239
00:28:53.500 --> 00:29:04.500
People sort of defensively apologized for not having a fascist regime because fascism was so obviously occurent and modern and so on.

240
00:29:04.500 --> 00:29:27.500
So, what happened is that this new regime, Scottish family, now in the throne of England, decided to introduce this, many of the continental ways that we know of collectively as royal absolutism, this was the House of Stuart.

241
00:29:27.500 --> 00:29:57.500
Like other rulers and their henchmen, the stewards and apologists and their apologists for absolutism considered it the modern form of government, more streamlined than the older form that was hedged around by limitations and restrictions and also consisted of these archaic sounding, funny as Mark Thornton would have it, funny sounding limitations of the kind that we find in the Magna Carta, a very old-fashioned

242
00:29:57.500 --> 00:30:09.500
They were going to change things. The students decided to rule on their own without the benefit of the representatives of the people, of the taxpayers in parliament.

243
00:30:09.500 --> 00:30:15.500
When the time came that Charles I needed to raise money, he did it on his own authority.

244
00:30:15.500 --> 00:30:20.500
He levied ship money on the towns of England that had never had to pay it before.

245
00:30:20.500 --> 00:30:26.500
This was a special tax in order to support the Navy.

246
00:30:26.500 --> 00:30:43.500
The Navy and the seacoast towns had traditionally paid it because they were assumed to have more to gain from the Navy than other people, but now the same tax was levied simply on royal authority on inland towns.

247
00:30:43.500 --> 00:30:55.500
It did not amount to very much, just as the stamp tax and the tax on tea in the American colonies did not amount to very much, but the principle was unacceptable to the people.

248
00:30:55.500 --> 00:31:04.900
Sometimes apologists for the first American war of secession, the Revolutionary War, say,

249
00:31:04.900 --> 00:31:14.900
you know, why did they go to war? Why did they risk their lives, their fortune and their sacred honor for a couple of pennies in the pound?

250
00:31:14.900 --> 00:31:18.900
It's trivial. It's ridiculous. Well, it really was the principle.

251
00:31:18.900 --> 00:31:25.400
That is, if the king can do this on the small scale, if we accept that principle, he can do anything.

252
00:31:25.400 --> 00:31:35.400
The leaders of the English resistance came to say that under this king, there is nothing a man can call his own.

253
00:31:35.400 --> 00:31:41.400
Which is, I think, more and more becoming the slogan of the modern democratic state.

254
00:31:41.400 --> 00:31:48.400
There's, in the end, nothing that you can really call your own, once the state demands it.

255
00:31:48.400 --> 00:31:54.400
So, the English Civil War came and the parliamentary forces eventually defeated the royalists.

256
00:31:54.400 --> 00:32:06.400
Charles was captured, put on trial and executed, and a new regime was set up under the military leader Oliver Cromwell and what remained of Parliament.

257
00:32:06.400 --> 00:32:23.700
However, there were radical ideas that had been let loose, and there were some people who began to say this Cromwell and this Parliament, or what's left of it, are beginning to act in the same way that the Stuarts did.

258
00:32:23.700 --> 00:32:27.700
It doesn't matter that the stewards were kings, that's not the important point.

259
00:32:27.700 --> 00:32:32.700
What matters is how the government acts.

260
00:32:32.700 --> 00:32:40.700
And a group of writers joined together.

261
00:32:40.700 --> 00:32:49.700
Their major spokesman was John Lilburn.

262
00:32:49.700 --> 00:32:54.200
and the Leveller Manifestos are available in a number of editions.

263
00:32:54.200 --> 00:32:59.700
Others included Richard Overton, William Walwyn, and so on.

264
00:32:59.700 --> 00:33:08.700
Lilburn had been arrested under Charles I for having violated the monopoly of the Stationer's Company by importing books from Holland.

265
00:33:08.700 --> 00:33:15.700
One of the characteristics of the absolute monarchs, and especially of the stewards, was the creation of monopolies.

266
00:33:15.700 --> 00:33:26.700
Monopolies, as they were understood in those days, were special privileged grants given to private individuals by the state.

267
00:33:26.700 --> 00:33:35.700
Monopolies were not considered a natural outgrowth of the free market. This was purely a state invention.

268
00:33:35.700 --> 00:33:45.700
And in this case, this particular stationer's guild, or printer's guild, had a monopoly of importing books.

269
00:33:45.700 --> 00:33:52.700
He tried to import books and he was arrested. For this he was whipped down the length of Fleet Street.

270
00:33:52.700 --> 00:33:59.700
I'd forgotten that it was Fleet Street. I wonder if there's any monument there. And thrown into prison.

271
00:33:59.700 --> 00:34:10.700
But, Littleburn noticed that the stationer's monopoly was not abolished by the new revolutionary government, but only renamed.

272
00:34:10.700 --> 00:34:25.700
So that it remained, and it was a thorn in his side, and it turned him to thinking about whether this new regime was really much different from the previous one.

273
00:34:25.700 --> 00:34:30.380
There was a monopoly of the Merchant Adventurers' Company in foreign trade.

274
00:34:30.380 --> 00:34:39.620
Now, what the Levellers demanded was,

275
00:34:39.620 --> 00:34:41.980
though this is a statement of theirs,

276
00:34:41.980 --> 00:34:45.860
that it shall not be in their power, shall not be in Parliament's power,

277
00:34:45.860 --> 00:34:48.860
not just the King's power, but now Parliament's power,

278
00:34:48.860 --> 00:34:53.420
to continue or make any laws to abridge or hinder any person or persons

279
00:34:53.420 --> 00:34:59.820
from trading or merchandising into any place beyond the seas where any of this nation are free to trade.

280
00:34:59.820 --> 00:35:02.820
That is the abolition of foreign trade monopolies.

281
00:35:02.820 --> 00:35:08.620
They favored the abolition of tithes for any religion whatsoever.

282
00:35:08.620 --> 00:35:13.020
There should be no coerced support of religion.

283
00:35:13.020 --> 00:35:16.620
They were the first to present a comprehensive program including

284
00:35:16.620 --> 00:35:21.820
the abolition of government monopolies, the total separation of religion in the state,

285
00:35:21.820 --> 00:35:28.020
Freedom of the Press, lower taxes, and a democratic reform of the franchise.

286
00:35:28.020 --> 00:35:36.660
They also believed that it was kind of mean of the English to try to exterminate the Irish.

287
00:35:36.660 --> 00:35:40.780
They were given the name levelers by their enemies, who accused them of advocating an

288
00:35:40.780 --> 00:35:47.200
egalitarian leveling of all economic and social distinctions, which is patently untrue.

289
00:35:47.200 --> 00:35:54.320
As a matter of fact, the Canadian McPherson maintained that the Levellers were a typical

290
00:35:54.320 --> 00:36:02.200
product of bourgeois liberalism and in fact favored restricting the franchise, extending

291
00:36:02.200 --> 00:36:08.200
the franchise but restricting it to those who pay taxes so that paupers could not vote

292
00:36:08.200 --> 00:36:12.980
and domestic servants could not vote because they were considered too much under the influence

293
00:36:12.980 --> 00:36:35.980
It is odd that Russell Kirk accepted the interpretation of the Levellers as egalitarians and grouped them together with the Diggers, who were in fact a communist sect of the time.

294
00:36:35.980 --> 00:36:51.820
The Levelers were important on two theoretical counts.

295
00:36:51.820 --> 00:36:56.380
First they opposed the infringement on individual rights that came now not from the King but

296
00:36:56.380 --> 00:37:02.380
from Parliament, and second they disconnected the ideas of liberty and right from the ancient

297
00:37:02.380 --> 00:37:07.980
matrix of historical privilege that characterized them in the Middle Ages.

298
00:37:07.980 --> 00:37:13.020
They did from time to time talk about the Norman yoke, to go back to what Joe said in

299
00:37:13.020 --> 00:37:14.860
the last session.

300
00:37:14.860 --> 00:37:22.260
That is that the Anglo-Saxon Britain had enjoyed basic freedom and then the Normans came over

301
00:37:22.260 --> 00:37:26.200
and imposed a centralized oppressive government.

302
00:37:26.200 --> 00:37:28.420
They did talk in that way.

303
00:37:28.420 --> 00:37:39.420
These are a transitionary group. However, they went beyond that, and as one level of manifesto famously put it, Magna Carta itself is but a beggarly thing.

304
00:37:41.420 --> 00:37:48.420
That is, we have to go beyond Magna Carta, which lists certain rights, to universal natural rights.

305
00:37:58.420 --> 00:38:26.420
Well, Richard Overton, one of the main leveler pamphleteers, the main one after Lilburn put it in a quotation, a very good quotation, which I'm afraid, yes, here we go, sorry.

306
00:38:26.420 --> 00:38:38.420
To every individual in nature is given an individual property by nature, not to be invaded or usurped by any.

307
00:38:38.420 --> 00:38:49.420
For everyone as he is himself, so he hath a self-property, property in your own self, else he could not be himself.

308
00:38:49.420 --> 00:39:17.420
And on this no second may presume or deprive to deprive any of without manifest violation and affront to the very principles of nature, making it kind of metaphysical, and to the rule of equity and justice between man and man. Mine and thine, that is private property, cannot be except this be. No man hath power over my rights and liberties and I over no man's.

309
00:39:17.420 --> 00:39:24.300
This is a kind of pre-echo of Herbert Spencer's law of equal freedom and you can see we're now

310
00:39:24.300 --> 00:39:32.060
in a different intellectual world from having recourse to ancient documents and promises of

311
00:39:32.060 --> 00:39:39.100
kings and pledges and so on. This is the world of abstract natural rights.

312
00:39:39.100 --> 00:39:51.260
Now, although they were defeated, the Levellers left an important legacy of radical liberal

313
00:39:51.260 --> 00:40:00.000
thought among the English-speaking people. They were defeated. Charles II returned, Cromwell

314
00:40:00.000 --> 00:40:07.240
died and Charles II returned in the Restoration. The Levellers tried to influence things through

315
00:40:07.240 --> 00:40:13.800
Through the New Model Army, but that is through actual gaining influence over the military

316
00:40:13.800 --> 00:40:19.800
personnel, but Cromwell and his people were able to thwart that, so they never got very

317
00:40:19.800 --> 00:40:26.720
far. However, they left this legacy. Murray Rothbard calls them the world's first self-consciously

318
00:40:26.720 --> 00:40:33.360
libertarian mass movement and he refers to Locke and his patron, the Earl of Shaftesbury,

319
00:40:33.360 --> 00:40:38.360
This is working out a neo-leveler synthesis.

320
00:40:38.360 --> 00:40:44.360
One of the levelers was named Richard Rumbolt, and he famously said,

321
00:40:44.360 --> 00:40:53.360
None comes into this world with a saddle upon his back, nor any booted and spurred to ride him.

322
00:40:53.360 --> 00:41:01.360
And that was later quoted by, nobody has ever heard that attributed, that was quoted by Jefferson.

323
00:41:01.360 --> 00:41:11.360
To Jefferson, Tom Paine and the American Revolution, Price and Priestley at the time of the French Revolution,

324
00:41:11.360 --> 00:41:17.360
the Jeffersonian and Jacksonian traditions in America, the anti-corn law movement in Britain,

325
00:41:17.360 --> 00:41:25.360
many other classical liberal and libertarian movements can be traced back to the Levellers.

326
00:41:25.360 --> 00:41:40.400
Now, a name that everybody knows in the history of classic liberalism is that of John Locke.

327
00:41:40.400 --> 00:41:44.640
Locke is the great fountainhead of liberal thought in the English-speaking world.

328
00:41:44.640 --> 00:41:51.700
His ideas were crucial in the American colonies, especially as spread through the writings

329
00:41:51.700 --> 00:41:54.800
of Gordon and Trenchard.

330
00:41:54.800 --> 00:42:00.560
And with Locke we have the conception of society as ruled by the law before the establishment

331
00:42:00.560 --> 00:42:06.240
of government, imagining government out of the picture.

332
00:42:06.240 --> 00:42:07.240
What would we have?

333
00:42:07.240 --> 00:42:12.560
Well, not a Hobbesian state of war of all against all, but a state ruled by the law

334
00:42:12.560 --> 00:42:17.720
of nature and the fundamental idea of the law of nature being the right of each individual

335
00:42:17.720 --> 00:42:24.480
to His Property. Property, if you read Locke carefully enough, or at least a little more

336
00:42:24.480 --> 00:42:29.960
carefully than some professors do, is the term that Locke gives not simply to material

337
00:42:29.960 --> 00:42:35.560
goods, but the collective term he uses for the individual's right to life, liberty and

338
00:42:35.560 --> 00:42:41.800
estates, material goods as well. But also his life, in the sense of Overton, you belong

339
00:42:41.800 --> 00:42:44.800
Liberty and Estates

340
00:42:44.800 --> 00:42:52.800
Governments are established for no other purpose than to secure these rights better than they can be secured in a state of nature.

341
00:42:52.800 --> 00:43:00.800
When instead the government becomes a violator of the rights of the people, the contract is broken and the people's right of resistance comes into operation.

342
00:43:00.800 --> 00:43:03.800
Something very familiar to us, right?

343
00:43:03.800 --> 00:43:12.800
This is the key conception in the first part of the Declaration of Independence.

344
00:43:12.800 --> 00:43:18.800
Jefferson said in writing the Declaration of Independence, he didn't consult any other works.

345
00:43:18.800 --> 00:43:23.800
Well, he didn't have to, because he knew Locke by heart on these points anyway.

346
00:43:23.800 --> 00:43:32.800
And this Lockean view of what government is and how it's related to protection of the rights of the individual

347
00:43:32.800 --> 00:43:47.380
The rights of the individual and what those rights are became standard for quite a while among English speaking people and I would say on some level still standard among the American people on some level.

348
00:43:47.380 --> 00:44:02.380
It is now known, through the work of Peter Laszlitt, that Locke had developed these ideas long before the Glorious Revolution of 1688, throughout James II and brought in William and Mary.

349
00:44:02.380 --> 00:44:11.380
What has come out of the work of Richard Ashcroft now is a better understanding of Locke as a radical.

350
00:44:11.380 --> 00:44:17.180
It turns out that Locke was deeply dissatisfied with the Glorious Revolution, the idol of

351
00:44:17.180 --> 00:44:20.860
so many Whig writers afterwards.

352
00:44:20.860 --> 00:44:24.460
In a letter to a close friend, he criticized the new government for busying itself with

353
00:44:24.460 --> 00:44:30.320
small matters when now they have an opportunity offered to find remedies and set up a constitution

354
00:44:30.320 --> 00:44:34.760
that may be lasting for the security of civil rights and the liberty and property of all

355
00:44:34.760 --> 00:44:37.020
the subjects of the nation.

356
00:44:37.020 --> 00:44:47.020
Well, there was, in other words, this more radical lock that has been buried for quite a while.

357
00:44:47.020 --> 00:44:55.020
A main consideration and a main thing to keep in mind in discussing the history of liberalism,

358
00:44:55.020 --> 00:45:00.020
unlike the way so many people do, especially philosophers do,

359
00:45:00.020 --> 00:45:06.980
is that liberalism was not simply a colloquy among talking heads, among philosophers over the century,

360
00:45:06.980 --> 00:45:12.980
over the centuries. I started this series of talks by discussing the miracle of Europe and the

361
00:45:12.980 --> 00:45:20.420
institutional arrangements that came into existence. Liberalism is an ideology, it's an intellectual

362
00:45:20.420 --> 00:45:26.820
product, however it developed over time, came into existence and developed over time in close

363
00:45:26.820 --> 00:45:47.820
People saw society as it operated around them, they reflected on it, they distilled their ideas, that is they went to a higher stage than what they saw prevalent in the society of their time, but it was a matter of a constant interaction.

364
00:45:47.820 --> 00:46:01.820
One of the best historians of this Anglo-American liberalism, although she certainly is not a great fan of the free market, is Joyce Appleby of UCLA.

365
00:46:01.820 --> 00:46:09.820
And Appleby wrote of England in the 17th century,

366
00:46:09.820 --> 00:46:19.260
It was then that people discovered the underlying regularity of free market activity, and in

367
00:46:19.260 --> 00:46:23.340
so doing they had come upon a possibility and a reality.

368
00:46:23.340 --> 00:46:28.020
The reality was that individuals making decisions about their own persons and property were

369
00:46:28.020 --> 00:46:31.040
the determiners of price in the market.

370
00:46:31.040 --> 00:46:37.160
The possibility was that the economic rationalism of market participants could supply the order

371
00:46:37.160 --> 00:46:44.360
to the Economy Formerly Secured Through Authority, that is, the mercantilist economy.

372
00:46:44.360 --> 00:46:53.520
She also wrote about America and the Jeffersonian tradition in America.

373
00:46:53.520 --> 00:46:57.440
This is of America in the later 18th century.

374
00:46:57.440 --> 00:47:03.280
She says, in the 18th century, two features of the market economy fascinated contemporaries.

375
00:47:03.280 --> 00:47:09.480
The Reliance upon Individual Initiative and the Absence of Authoritarian Direction

376
00:47:09.480 --> 00:47:14.440
A century and a quarter of economic development by the time the American Revolution came along

377
00:47:14.440 --> 00:47:19.440
had dramatically enhanced public opinion about voluntary human actions

378
00:47:19.440 --> 00:47:28.440
and society was the word that emerged to represent the uncoerced relations of people living under the same authority

379
00:47:28.440 --> 00:47:31.640
It is this vision which animated the Jeffersonians

380
00:47:31.640 --> 00:47:41.040
And this is easily illustrated by many authorities, the famous statement by Thomas Sopane that

381
00:47:41.040 --> 00:47:49.040
society under every condition is a good state, government on the other hand is at best a

382
00:47:49.040 --> 00:47:50.800
necessary evil.

383
00:47:50.800 --> 00:47:56.880
This contrast between society, the realm of individual, voluntary interaction, and the

384
00:47:56.880 --> 00:47:58.440
state, the realm of coercion.

385
00:47:58.440 --> 00:48:06.160
And she says it was the, since England was far away, and there was no standing army,

386
00:48:06.160 --> 00:48:13.100
and the coercive policies were very hard to put into effect, de facto, pretty much a laissez-faire

387
00:48:13.100 --> 00:48:16.240
society had come into existence in America.

388
00:48:16.240 --> 00:48:19.600
People saw that it worked, it worked real fine.

389
00:48:19.600 --> 00:48:24.760
Reflected on that, and then as I say, raised the reflection to a higher level in the works,

390
00:48:24.760 --> 00:48:43.760
The role of exemplary experiments in the development of liberalism in Europe was crucial. As Holland was the example to Europe, especially to England, so England became the example to Europe, especially to France and to Germany.

391
00:48:43.760 --> 00:48:52.760
Later, the example of America. The colonies and then the republic exerted a strong influence on Germany, France and elsewhere in Europe.

392
00:48:52.760 --> 00:48:56.760
In Poland, to take one example at random, pretty much.

393
00:48:56.760 --> 00:49:10.760
The final attempted reforms of Piotr Poniatowski and the Constitution of 1791 were affected by American ideas through Philippe Matzai, a friend of Jefferson's.

394
00:49:10.760 --> 00:49:14.760
and other examples could be given.

395
00:49:14.760 --> 00:49:18.760
Gradually, the observation and deduction distilled and refined

396
00:49:18.760 --> 00:49:22.760
the basic concept of liberal social theory, which I mentioned

397
00:49:22.760 --> 00:49:26.760
at the beginning of my talk. Laissez-faire.

398
00:49:26.760 --> 00:49:30.760
The idea that by and large civil society runs itself.

399
00:49:30.760 --> 00:49:34.760
It was put in precisely these terms by the French,

400
00:49:34.760 --> 00:49:38.760
laissez-faire, laissez-passer, le monde va de lui-même,

401
00:49:38.760 --> 00:49:43.760
The World Goes by Itself

402
00:49:43.760 --> 00:49:48.760
One of the prime advocates of this doctrine was the great Chergo.

403
00:49:48.760 --> 00:50:05.760
This is unusual in historical discourse, usually historians reserve the term great for mass murderers, people who murder, maim and blind their brothers and sisters, their brothers, so that nobody else should have a claim to the throne.

404
00:50:05.760 --> 00:50:14.960
People who serve whole classes of the population, as Catherine the Great helped in Russia, and so on.

405
00:50:14.960 --> 00:50:23.160
Or for people who unleashed world wars, in 18th century terms, as Frederick the Great did in Prussia.

406
00:50:23.160 --> 00:50:30.960
But Turgot was an actual benefactor of the people, and is sometimes, at least, called the Great.

407
00:50:30.960 --> 00:50:34.960
Let's read the chapter on to go in Murray's history of economic thought.

408
00:50:36.960 --> 00:50:39.960
Murray considers him a dazzling economist.

409
00:50:41.960 --> 00:50:46.960
I think that the chapter begins something along these lines at a chess tournament.

410
00:50:46.960 --> 00:50:51.960
Murray loved chess. They give prizes for the most brilliant play.

411
00:50:51.960 --> 00:50:58.960
Not necessarily the most successful or most smashing, but stylistically brilliant.

412
00:50:58.960 --> 00:51:12.960
Really chic, you might say, and Murray thought that Togo was such an economist, a short book on economic theory, long before, considerably before Adam Smith.

413
00:51:12.960 --> 00:51:20.960
This is one of the things to, now I hope that, well let's not assume anything.

414
00:51:20.960 --> 00:51:29.960
To go was one of the philosophs. He was not a militant anti-Catholic or atheist as some of the others were.

415
00:51:29.960 --> 00:51:37.960
He was the mentor of Condorcet. He was very highly thought of among the philosophs.

416
00:51:37.960 --> 00:51:46.960
And then for a very brief while, when Louis XVI became king, he was brought in as finance minister

417
00:51:46.960 --> 00:51:52.440
in order to try to save the very troubled French monarchy.

418
00:51:52.440 --> 00:51:56.640
And he brought in some reforms, very needed reforms.

419
00:51:56.640 --> 00:52:00.080
He was planning, doing away with the Corvée, for instance,

420
00:52:00.080 --> 00:52:06.400
forced labor, and was doing away with the guilds,

421
00:52:06.400 --> 00:52:09.120
and was planning others, such as toleration

422
00:52:09.120 --> 00:52:14.520
of the Protestants and regional representative institutions.

423
00:52:14.520 --> 00:52:36.520
But he was done in very clear public choice terms by the cabal at the court, headed by Marie Antoinette and probably the last chance for the Bourbon monarchy was gone and Louis XVI and his wife were going to be paying for that in a few years' time.

424
00:52:36.520 --> 00:52:51.520
Nonetheless, he was remembered very fondly by lovers of freedom in France, but to give an example of how social thought at the time and how liberal thought is being advanced, this is what Turgot wrote,

425
00:52:51.520 --> 00:52:58.560
The policy to be pursued by government should consist in following the course of nature and the course of commerce,

426
00:52:58.560 --> 00:53:05.360
not less necessary nor irresistible than that of nature, and without endeavoring to direct it.

427
00:53:05.360 --> 00:53:11.360
Because, in order to direct it without distorting it and without doing damage to yourself,

428
00:53:11.360 --> 00:53:18.960
it would be necessary to be able to follow all the changes in the needs and interests and the industry of mankind.

429
00:53:18.960 --> 00:53:29.960
To accumulate all this vast amount of knowledge, it would be necessary to know these in such detail as would be physically impossible to arrive at.

430
00:53:29.960 --> 00:53:47.960
Even if one had, concerning all the particulars, that massive knowledge, which it is impossible to gather, the result would only be to let things go precisely as they would have gone by themselves, by the simple action of men's interests, influenced by the balance of free competition.

431
00:53:47.960 --> 00:53:55.960
Those of you who are familiar with the history of the Austrian School, I think, can see that this rings a bell.

432
00:53:55.960 --> 00:54:07.960
This is Mises and Hayek's amplification of the theory of the role of knowledge in society and why central planning is ultimately impossible and futile.

433
00:54:07.960 --> 00:54:21.960
The decentralized, even tacit knowledge of the economy that exists everywhere, scattered, cannot be brought together and the central plan is a doom from the start.

434
00:54:21.960 --> 00:54:27.960
And here we have that central idea as expressed by Turgot.

435
00:54:27.960 --> 00:54:39.560
Now, in the 18th century, there was, of course, the French Enlightenment, much of which can

436
00:54:39.560 --> 00:54:45.760
be considered dubious. I'm going to be talking about Rousseau later on. There was also, however,

437
00:54:45.760 --> 00:54:51.440
something that has gotten more attention recently, and that is the Scottish Enlightenment. Well,

438
00:54:51.440 --> 00:55:05.440
The Chief Figures of which were Adam Smith, David Hume, Adam Ferguson, and there were others as well.

439
00:55:05.440 --> 00:55:20.440
Hayek was very fond of the Scottish school, loved Adam Smith in particular, Murray not nearly so fond,

440
00:55:20.440 --> 00:55:33.280
Murray could never really take some intellectual figure and say, well, this is where I disagree

441
00:55:33.280 --> 00:55:45.280
with the man, and he has a right to his own opinion. He had to totally smash him. And he

442
00:55:45.280 --> 00:56:10.280
He does, in regard to Adam Smith, thinks of him as a retrogression from what already even the Spanish scholastics, let alone French economists like Togo, had accomplished, bringing in, well, there's a debate whether Adam Smith believed in the labor theory of value, but certainly he gives us enough reason in Wealth of Nations to support the labor theory of value.

443
00:56:10.280 --> 00:56:22.280
In criticizing Smith, it's not that Murray was going in some crazy direction all by himself. Schumpeter pretty much says the same thing.

444
00:56:22.280 --> 00:56:29.280
So people who attack, as some of the reviewers did, Murray, for being too critical of Smith, should look up Schumpeter.

445
00:56:29.280 --> 00:56:42.280
What I would say is this, leaving aside Smith as an original economist and contributed to the development of economic theory,

446
00:56:42.280 --> 00:56:57.280
Smith's influence, the influence of his implied and sometimes made explicit social policy, political policy, was to the good.

447
00:56:57.280 --> 00:57:26.280
Little else is a requisite to carry a state to the highest degree of opulence from the lowest barbarism, but peace, easy taxes, and tolerable administration of justice, peace, low taxes, and the rule of law.

448
00:57:26.280 --> 00:57:32.280
and the rule of law, all the rest being brought about by the natural course of things.

449
00:57:32.280 --> 00:57:41.280
Now, if you think about it, and that was in fact quoted by this Australian economist I mentioned in the last lecture,

450
00:57:41.280 --> 00:57:51.280
in his book on the European miracle, that is the position of these European miracle institutional approach type economists,

451
00:57:51.280 --> 00:57:56.680
But what we have to explain is the lack of economic progress, and that's explained by

452
00:57:56.680 --> 00:58:01.540
the state acting, among other things, but the main thing, the state acting in its traditional

453
00:58:01.540 --> 00:58:04.280
role as predator on society.

454
00:58:04.280 --> 00:58:14.680
If instead of that we had what Smith recommended, that is, peace, easy taxes and the rule of

455
00:58:14.680 --> 00:58:21.720
of Law, then you would find some economic development at least everywhere.

456
00:58:21.720 --> 00:58:27.320
And this general view and his idea of the invisible hand, which lends itself to the

457
00:58:27.320 --> 00:58:34.120
laissez-faire idea, did help in a positive direction in the decades after.

458
00:58:34.120 --> 00:58:39.980
An example of this, an example of the power of ideas, is a man who wrote I guess the first

459
00:58:39.980 --> 00:58:46.900
The biography of Adam Smith, his own student, Dougal Stuart. Dougal Stuart occupied the

460
00:58:46.900 --> 00:58:55.620
chair of Moral Philosophy at the University of Edinburgh for 25 years, until 1810. He

461
00:58:55.620 --> 00:59:01.000
taught that a great part of the order which, quote, we are apt to ascribe to legislative

462
00:59:01.000 --> 00:59:08.700
sagacity is the natural result of the selfish pursuits of individuals. Practically the same

463
00:59:08.700 --> 00:59:34.700
The University of Edinburgh, the first editor of the Edinburgh Review

464
00:59:34.700 --> 00:59:43.200
The Edinburgh Review was the great review of Whig classical liberal thought in the first half of the 19th century in England.

465
00:59:43.200 --> 00:59:49.200
Macaulay, for instance, wrote almost all of his essays for the Edinburgh Review.

466
00:59:49.200 --> 00:59:53.200
Henry Broom, the famous Whig member of parliament.

467
00:59:53.200 --> 00:59:59.200
Henry Reeve, who was the first translator of Tocqueville's Democracy in America.

468
00:59:59.200 --> 01:00:13.200
Sidney Smith, Sidney Smith was a great Anglican clergyman, liberal politician, or liberal polemicist who favored Catholic emancipation and other liberal reforms

469
01:00:13.200 --> 01:00:33.200
And there's a great quotation that Murray liked from Sidney Smith, who was kind of a wit about all of the terrible, the unfortunate, deplorable consequences of England involving itself in everybody's troubles throughout the world.

470
01:00:33.200 --> 01:00:42.200
And he wrote to an aristocratic friend of his, please, I know all these things, all these terrible things are happening. The Tibetans are not happy.

471
01:00:42.200 --> 01:00:48.200
The Delta is in turmoil, and on and on and on. Don't force me to worry about all the rest of the world.

472
01:00:48.200 --> 01:00:55.240
I want peace, economy, retrenchment, contentment. So, an isolationist as well.

473
01:00:56.200 --> 01:01:03.320
Among the other students of Dugal Steward was a man named James Mill, Lord Palmerston,

474
01:01:03.320 --> 01:01:09.720
not that he was such a great liberal, and Lord John Russell. Palmerston and Russell,

475
01:01:09.720 --> 01:01:13.720
Two most influential Whig politicians of the middle 19th century.

476
01:01:13.720 --> 01:01:22.720
These people all had studied under Dougal Stuart, not necessarily that they learned all of liberal philosophy from him,

477
01:01:22.720 --> 01:01:34.720
but they were influenced, in some cases to a large degree, in some cases to a somewhat lesser degree.

478
01:01:34.720 --> 01:01:41.720
Well, then comes the French Revolution.

479
01:01:41.720 --> 01:01:50.220
And in discussing the history of liberalism, there are a number of distorting factors.

480
01:01:50.220 --> 01:02:00.220
And one is to consider the French Revolution even fundamentally, to my mind, even fundamentally a liberal revolution.

481
01:02:00.220 --> 01:02:10.100
Yes, in the end, there were some liberal reforms made, religious toleration, for instance, equality of classes before the law.

482
01:02:10.100 --> 01:02:20.060
But these were reforms that were in the cards. These were reforms that the French monarchy was edging toward.

483
01:02:20.060 --> 01:02:26.980
It was not going to happen in two years. On the other hand, what did the French Revolution do?

484
01:02:26.980 --> 01:02:31.660
It brought in 25 years of war that only ended in Waterloo.

485
01:02:31.660 --> 01:02:35.380
So it put back reform in many respects.

486
01:02:35.380 --> 01:02:41.820
You have to ask yourself whether the quickening of the pace of reform,

487
01:02:41.820 --> 01:02:46.700
of the necessary and liberal reforms, was worth what they had to go through.

488
01:02:46.700 --> 01:02:51.780
So that to consider this, or the declaration of the rights of man and of the citizen,

489
01:02:51.780 --> 01:02:54.340
as Joe said in his last lecture,

490
01:02:54.340 --> 01:02:59.140
In no way is it as unequivocal as the American Bill of Rights.

491
01:03:01.220 --> 01:03:07.300
They say, for instance, that there shall be freedom of thought even for religion

492
01:03:09.300 --> 01:03:19.380
within the limits of the law. They never got to the American point. Congress shall make no law

493
01:03:19.380 --> 01:03:24.900
and More, Regarding the Establishment of a Religion or Prohibiting the Free Exercise

494
01:03:24.900 --> 01:03:25.900
Thereof.

495
01:03:25.900 --> 01:03:32.220
Now, of course, this didn't mean the separation of church and state within the states, but

496
01:03:32.220 --> 01:03:35.820
it meant that the federal government could do nothing along these lines.

497
01:03:35.820 --> 01:03:42.580
And then, to my mind, you didn't need the 14th Amendment and incorporation, the 14th

498
01:03:42.580 --> 01:03:48.180
Amendment to the, using the Bill of Rights against states.

499
01:03:48.180 --> 01:03:55.820
would have happened along the lines of ordinary federalism. That is, if people of a certain

500
01:03:55.820 --> 01:04:01.700
denomination were discriminated against or taxed in a certain state, there'd be a tendency

501
01:04:01.700 --> 01:04:10.380
to move somewhere else. And the states that continued such discrimination or establishment

502
01:04:10.380 --> 01:04:17.640
of a religion to some degree or another would suffer for it, economically and otherwise,

503
01:04:17.640 --> 01:04:24.280
So that eventually, I don't know how long, but in a few decades, as it in fact happened,

504
01:04:24.280 --> 01:04:30.040
because even before the period of the time of the incorporation of the 14th, of the Bill

505
01:04:30.040 --> 01:04:34.920
of Rights into the 14th, through the 14th Amendment, the states, I think in virtually

506
01:04:34.920 --> 01:04:40.860
every case, Joe, would correct me about this, but even before the Civil War, the states

507
01:04:40.860 --> 01:04:48.500
abolished any kind of religious superiority among denominations as the Episcopal Church

508
01:04:48.500 --> 01:04:54.580
had at first been privileged in Virginia and as a congregationalist had been privileged

509
01:04:54.580 --> 01:04:55.580
in Massachusetts.

510
01:04:55.580 --> 01:05:01.220
That did fade away even without forcing the states to do it.

511
01:05:01.220 --> 01:05:07.100
So that in France we could have had these reforms eventually and peaceful organic reforms

512
01:05:07.100 --> 01:05:17.100
are always superior, it seems to me, unless we're talking about extreme cases to revolution and, especially, subsequent war.

513
01:05:17.100 --> 01:05:28.100
The French Revolution led to a series of disasters, one after the other.

514
01:05:28.100 --> 01:05:40.460
The Asegnat paper money inflation that then brought about price controls and other measures.

515
01:05:40.460 --> 01:05:48.260
The confiscation of the church land, which not only shook the principle of private ownership

516
01:05:48.260 --> 01:05:52.220
of land, but also presented the problem what to do about the church now.

517
01:05:52.220 --> 01:05:54.220
How was the church to be supported?

518
01:05:54.220 --> 01:05:56.100
That brought the state into the question.

519
01:05:56.100 --> 01:06:07.100
And the state, from then on, in France, as in most European countries, continued to support the Church, and not just the Catholic Church afterwards, but other denominations as well.

520
01:06:07.100 --> 01:06:17.100
The American principle was not learned by them. The American principle of there shall be no law. Congress shall make no law establishing a religion.

521
01:06:17.100 --> 01:06:30.100
Just total separation, leaving religion, among many other things, to society, rather than monopolizing the religious realm by the state.

522
01:06:30.100 --> 01:06:46.100
And the French Revolution, having been lived through and experienced and witnessed, things happened to liberalism itself.

523
01:06:46.100 --> 01:06:54.100
The liberals, by and large, had welcomed certain of the early reforms and the so-called first phase of the revolution.

524
01:06:54.100 --> 01:07:01.100
But there had also been the emergence of unexpected, of unheard of violations of individual liberty.

525
01:07:01.100 --> 01:07:08.100
The reign of terror of 1993-94, which claimed to be warranted by popular sovereignty.

526
01:07:08.100 --> 01:07:15.100
And then the reign of Napoleon, whose actions were confirmed by democratic plebiscites.

527
01:07:15.100 --> 01:07:21.480
and who brought centralization of government power to new heights.

528
01:07:21.480 --> 01:07:28.360
This was an important innovation of Napoleon's, followed then by his nephew, Napoleon III,

529
01:07:28.360 --> 01:07:35.240
and also by the dictators of the 20th century, to have their actions confirmed, okayed in

530
01:07:35.240 --> 01:07:42.120
a pseudo-democratic way by having elections, having plebiscites.

531
01:07:42.120 --> 01:07:47.960
Two things the liberals learned. First, the democracy,?the alleged rule by the people,

532
01:07:47.960 --> 01:07:53.800
may in fact represent the rule of a determined minority that aims to control society. And

533
01:07:53.800 --> 01:08:01.520
second, the liberals were infused with what has been called state hatred. Where the liberals

534
01:08:01.520 --> 01:08:13.080
Those before that, many of them, had felt that the state was essentially a neutral device

535
01:08:13.080 --> 01:08:19.520
that could be utilized in the favorable conditions to bring about many valuable reforms in society.

536
01:08:19.520 --> 01:08:26.200
Instead, now the state was looked on as a locus of constant threats to freedom and as

537
01:08:26.200 --> 01:08:32.240
There is a self-interested enemy, standing enemy, perpetual enemy of civil society.

538
01:08:32.240 --> 01:08:40.520
I hope that verbiage made clear what point I was trying to make, which is that even someone

539
01:08:40.520 --> 01:08:47.600
like Turgot, certainly someone like Voltaire, thought and said, how do you bring about these

540
01:08:47.600 --> 01:08:52.880
necessary reforms towards individual freedom in society, well, you whisper in the ear of

541
01:08:52.880 --> 01:09:02.880
The King now has all the power that's necessary and he will bring about the reforms so that society can be improved in this way.

542
01:09:02.880 --> 01:09:17.880
Afterwards, they understood that whoever controlled the state apparatus, whether they said that they were legitimized by democratic majorities, as the revolutionary governments did,

543
01:09:17.880 --> 01:09:30.880
or Napoleon, who said he was legitimized by plebiscite once in a while, whether control of the centralized state apparatus could use it to damage, seriously damage civil society.

544
01:09:30.880 --> 01:09:34.880
The state had to be looked on with suspicion.

545
01:09:34.880 --> 01:09:41.880
Well, I think I'll stop now and we'll entertain comments and questions as before.

546
01:09:41.880 --> 01:09:49.380
and welcome. Any questions you might have? Any comments you might have about this whole story?

547
01:09:49.380 --> 01:09:49.880
Yeah.

548
01:09:49.880 --> 01:09:54.880
I have a question about Locke, and it's kind of reflecting the level of stuff I don't know very much about.

549
01:09:54.880 --> 01:10:01.380
I know that in the case of Locke, when he talks about property in the second treaty on government,

550
01:10:01.380 --> 01:10:10.880
he does make provisions for national property or public property and for state intervention in private property.

551
01:10:10.880 --> 01:10:14.880
And I have no doubt that he was influential on later levels, but...

552
01:10:14.880 --> 01:10:19.880
Well, okay. You don't mean the Lockean proviso.

553
01:10:19.880 --> 01:10:30.880
Well, this is the situation. How does property, which in the state of nature originally was common to mankind when God created the world,

554
01:10:30.880 --> 01:10:34.880
how does it come to be private property?

555
01:10:34.880 --> 01:10:42.640
Well, how does an individual attach part of nature to himself? By mixing his labor with

556
01:10:42.640 --> 01:10:51.840
what he finds in nature. And that way, well, to give you an example, a person in his family

557
01:10:51.840 --> 01:11:00.640
finds some piece of land and clears the land and pulls out the tree stumps and creates

558
01:11:00.640 --> 01:11:27.640
The proviso that's been discussed by philosophers is this, people may in this way bring what is in the state of nature into private property, provided that as much and as good, he said, Locke says, is left over for others.

559
01:11:27.640 --> 01:11:31.640
Well, that could create problems. How do you know what's left over for others?

560
01:11:31.640 --> 01:11:36.640
How do you know what's necessary and good enough to be left over?

561
01:11:36.640 --> 01:11:40.640
How would anybody then begin to appropriate private property?

562
01:11:40.640 --> 01:11:43.640
Okay, but this was not what you meant.

563
01:11:43.640 --> 01:11:48.640
Okay, so scratch everything I said.

564
01:11:48.640 --> 01:11:55.640
There were specific references to state control over property and the difference...

565
01:11:55.640 --> 01:12:16.640
State control of a property. Okay. Well, that doesn't ring a bell. But what is the case is that in his other economic views, Locke sometimes interpreted as being a mercantilist, that is favoring government regulation of the economy and international trade and so on.

566
01:12:16.640 --> 01:12:23.640
I don't know enough about it. That's certainly not why Locke is famous in the history of liberalism.

567
01:12:23.640 --> 01:12:32.640
My question was, in the context of the 17th century, property as such included public property.

568
01:12:32.640 --> 01:12:36.640
It's not just in Locke, it's also in Hobbes and in Gorgias.

569
01:12:36.640 --> 01:12:43.640
But I was just wondering to what extent that affected the Leveller's program.

570
01:12:43.640 --> 01:12:53.160
Well, no, the Levellers did favor public support of indigent people, the kind of minimum welfare,

571
01:12:53.160 --> 01:12:58.720
but that was the policy in England all along, ever since the disestablishment of the Catholic

572
01:12:58.720 --> 01:12:59.720
Church.

573
01:12:59.720 --> 01:13:05.640
The English state took over the responsibility, as the state did in most of Protestant Europe,

574
01:13:05.640 --> 01:13:08.120
for support of indigent people.

575
01:13:08.120 --> 01:13:13.000
So that really is the extent of what you might want to call their deviations, or any way

576
01:13:13.000 --> 01:13:29.000
John Locke and his alleged mercantilism

577
01:13:29.000 --> 01:13:41.480
First of all, Karen Vaughan of George Mason University wrote a book on Locke as an economist

578
01:13:41.480 --> 01:13:46.360
and disputes the idea that he really was much of a mercantilist, he took over some of the

579
01:13:46.360 --> 01:13:51.680
international trade, mercantilist economic, international trade views of his time, but

580
01:13:51.680 --> 01:13:55.280
essentially not really a mercantilist thinker.

581
01:13:55.280 --> 01:13:59.640
The second thing to say would be that this is not why anybody would be interested in

582
01:13:59.640 --> 01:14:00.640
Locke.

583
01:14:00.640 --> 01:14:07.040
That is, his economic views or his mercantilist views to the extent they existed were pretty

584
01:14:07.040 --> 01:14:08.040
common.

585
01:14:08.040 --> 01:14:11.980
They're not anything that made very much of a difference or impression on the history

586
01:14:11.980 --> 01:14:12.980
of thought.

587
01:14:12.980 --> 01:14:17.880
What did make a difference in an impression on the history of thought were his liberal

588
01:14:17.880 --> 01:14:31.880
and his idea of the state of nature, the original, natural rights of individuals, predating civil society, the right of revolution and so on.

589
01:14:31.880 --> 01:14:37.880
So that on that basis I would consider him undeniably in the liberal tradition.

590
01:14:37.880 --> 01:14:39.880
Yes?

591
01:14:39.880 --> 01:14:58.880
was a lot of that original in this respect, because I think that Murray was some memorable watcher in the API of mixing labor and all that concept, wasn't it?

592
01:14:58.880 --> 01:15:10.880
Wait a minute. You're saying whether he was original in his idea of how property originates.

593
01:15:10.880 --> 01:15:18.880
No, I'm not saying he's original in that at all. What I'm saying is that that is considered by people who study the lock-in philosophy,

594
01:15:18.880 --> 01:15:25.880
called the lock-in proviso, and considered a problem, that is, and for the reasons I gave.

595
01:15:25.880 --> 01:15:31.880
But I have a specific question, and that was on the Bill of Rights.

596
01:15:35.880 --> 01:15:48.880
I didn't quite understand it, but wasn't the Bill of Rights originally drafted as against the federal government, as opposed to the states?

597
01:15:55.880 --> 01:16:04.880
It was interpreted that the states also were required to adhere to the Bill of Rights.

598
01:16:04.880 --> 01:16:12.880
Nobody's rights could be, as enumerated in the state, in the Bill of Rights, could be infringed on by any particular state.

599
01:16:12.880 --> 01:16:18.880
And it was the federal government's duty to see that the states adhere to that.

600
01:16:18.880 --> 01:16:44.880
What's that? Well, Joe, I'm sure knows a lot about this. There's a whole problem with the 14th Amendment to begin with, and it seems to me that even people who support it understand that there's a problem, whether it was legitimately passed.

601
01:16:44.880 --> 01:16:50.880
The problem was that a certain number of states, of course, have to pass any amendment to the Constitution.

602
01:16:50.880 --> 01:17:01.880
What happened in the case of the 14th Amendment was that the occupied southern states were forced to agree to the 14th Amendment,

603
01:17:01.880 --> 01:17:06.880
to the passage of the 14th Amendment, before they could be allowed into the Union.

604
01:17:06.880 --> 01:17:35.880
Right, but they were forced by the occupying power that erected the Reconstruction government to agree to the 14th Amendment, so that that was done under force majeure, and then afterwards, even given that, they barely had the two-thirds requirement to pass an amendment.

605
01:17:35.880 --> 01:17:42.420
to pass an amendment, and even after that, two or three of the states withdrew their

606
01:17:42.420 --> 01:17:48.600
agreement to the 14th Amendment, bringing it below the required number of states confirming

607
01:17:48.600 --> 01:17:56.640
the amendment, but nobody seems to care about that.

608
01:17:56.640 --> 01:18:01.440
So you might be interested in the details of the 14th Amendment.

609
01:18:01.440 --> 01:18:02.440
Harry?

610
01:18:02.440 --> 01:18:10.440
Yes, this may be a reiteration of the same question, but it's not a figure of answer.

611
01:18:10.440 --> 01:18:25.440
But in the same sense that you just brought up, is it possible for an understanding of the Bill of Rights as a directory for the Georgia Amendment,

612
01:18:25.440 --> 01:18:37.440
Is there some question as to whether both rights might authentically be interpreted as applying to the state as well as the federal government?

613
01:18:55.440 --> 01:19:21.440
A lot of detailed knowledge that I can't give you at the moment, but has been, there was a discussion in some libertarian publication a few years ago on this issue, and I think that the people, who's the man who's, George, what was his name, what was Healy's first name?

614
01:19:21.440 --> 01:19:30.440
Jean Healy, who's now at Cato, and a lawyer, maintained that it had not been validly agreed to.

615
01:19:30.440 --> 01:19:39.440
In any case, my own view is that the reconstruction amendments so expanded the power of the federal government

616
01:19:39.440 --> 01:19:45.440
that they're very dubious from a libertarian point of view.

617
01:19:45.440 --> 01:20:05.440
I guess I'm not sure I'm gonna have any occasion to bring this up, but the whole issue, if you've noticed, the people associated with the Mises Institute tend to be skeptical of American presidents in general, including, for some reason, our greatest presidents.

618
01:20:05.440 --> 01:20:32.440
for instance, Lincoln, and favor the southern cause, I wish that I'd noticed in the parking lot one or more cars with the bumper sticker that I've heard about but have not actually seen on a bumper, supposed to be common in South Carolina, if at first you don't secede try, try again.

619
01:20:32.440 --> 01:20:47.440
Now, there's a reason for this that is our, or my at least, and some of my friends, pro-Southern sympathies, and believe me, it has nothing to do with support of slavery.

620
01:20:47.440 --> 01:20:59.440
Lord Acton, whom I've mentioned before and I think you probably have heard of, was the greatest liberal historian of the 19th century, I would say, although he never wrote a full book.

621
01:20:59.440 --> 01:21:07.440
And he wrote, did everybody receive a copy of Costs of War?

622
01:21:07.440 --> 01:21:18.440
Huh? No? No? Hmm. Okay, I'll speak to some people about this.

623
01:21:18.440 --> 01:21:24.440
If you haven't, look, come on, Springfield, what is it, $30 or something.

624
01:21:24.440 --> 01:21:29.440
Get it for your mother for Christmas.

625
01:21:29.440 --> 01:21:42.440
The paperback edition is what you want, and that includes the correspondence between Lord Acton and Robert E. Lee after the war.

626
01:21:42.440 --> 01:21:54.440
And Acton said that his heart broke at Appomattox and the reason was that he had high hopes for America.

627
01:21:54.440 --> 01:21:59.440
However, he understood America was a democracy and history showed democracies have problems

628
01:21:59.440 --> 01:22:06.440
because democracy then puts total sovereignty into the people and the people's alleged representatives.

629
01:22:06.440 --> 01:22:12.440
And there's no limit to that power. An act that said states' rights was the limit to the power.

630
01:22:12.440 --> 01:22:18.440
Now the attempt to implement states' rights in the secession of the southern states has been crushed.

631
01:22:18.440 --> 01:22:22.440
And you have now a monopoly of power in the central government.

632
01:22:22.440 --> 01:22:26.440
And that's what's involved, not a defense of slavery.

633
01:22:26.440 --> 01:22:32.440
Just as when you talk about the actual soldiers who fought for the South in the war.

634
01:22:32.440 --> 01:23:01.440
As you know, the great majority never had a slave, the mountain boys of North Carolina and Tennessee and North Georgia and so on who really gave it good to the Yankees, outnumbered as they were, especially by these Irish and German Yankees who were brought in to fight on the side of the Republic.

635
01:23:01.440 --> 01:23:12.440
So, in general, I'm very suspicious of these reconstruction amendments and really everything that followed.

636
01:23:12.440 --> 01:23:17.440
Tom DiLorenzo has written not just on Lincoln, but about the consequences of war.

637
01:23:17.440 --> 01:23:23.440
If you haven't for some reason come across that, it's well worth consulting.

638
01:23:23.440 --> 01:23:30.440
And also Montesquieu, more in the direction of Turgot, but Montesquieu is a very, very

639
01:23:53.440 --> 01:24:07.440
is considered probably the most conservative of the major French philosophes, but then you get a left wing with Rousseau in a category by himself,

640
01:24:07.440 --> 01:24:17.440
but a left wing among the encyclopedists like Baron Dolbach and Helvetius and so on, Diderot,

641
01:24:17.440 --> 01:24:23.440
And you're getting beyond even anti-Catholicism into militant atheism.

642
01:24:23.440 --> 01:24:27.440
And that comes out in the later stages of the French Revolution.

643
01:24:27.440 --> 01:24:34.440
That is not just the idea that sure, we should have religious toleration, the Church should not be entitled to persecute.

644
01:24:34.440 --> 01:24:39.440
It goes beyond that, the persecution of the Catholic Church and of religion in general

645
01:24:39.440 --> 01:24:46.440
and the attempt to obliterate Christianity in France, as occurs during the Revolution.

646
01:24:46.440 --> 01:24:54.440
What do you attribute the misrepresentation of the Levellers? Is it politics at the time, or is that just something that's going into...

647
01:25:16.440 --> 01:25:31.440
If my memory is correct, there's a full set of the Journal of Economists in the University of Florida Library.

648
01:25:31.440 --> 01:25:34.440
And hardcover. I mean, hardcopies.

649
01:25:34.440 --> 01:25:40.440
I think the whole thing is there. Check on the Internet if you're in doubt, but I know some of the links are there.

650
01:25:40.440 --> 01:25:43.440
Well, what you should wait for is when the Library gets rid of it.

651
01:25:43.440 --> 01:26:07.440
Are any of the English economists who developed the labor theory of value familiar with either the Spanish or the French?

652
01:26:13.440 --> 01:26:21.040
with some of the French writers. He was close to the physiocrats and other leaders of the

653
01:26:21.040 --> 01:26:28.880
French economic thought at the time. But he was too eclectic, I think. Anyway, that's what Murray

654
01:26:28.880 --> 01:26:34.240
thought. That is, he couldn't take a certain point of view and follow it through consistently.

655
01:26:34.240 --> 01:26:41.200
He had to temper it by some other point of view, some other consideration. So that's why nobody

656
01:26:41.200 --> 01:26:47.640
really knows what his theory of value was, whether it was a labor theory of value, post-production

657
01:26:47.640 --> 01:26:48.640
theory of value.

658
01:26:48.640 --> 01:26:49.640
Yeah.

659
01:26:49.640 --> 01:26:50.640
I wanted to ask about what we perhaps see as some of the forms of classical liberalism

660
01:26:50.640 --> 01:26:51.640
that led to it being hijacked and somehow acquired by the socialists.

661
01:26:51.640 --> 01:26:52.640
Because, for example, we see that John Stuart Mill, sort of, I'm not sure if you...

662
01:26:52.640 --> 01:26:53.640
I think, yeah.

663
01:26:53.640 --> 01:26:54.640
Hans Hoppe has a chapter on democracy to go on and fail, where he criticizes classical

664
01:26:54.640 --> 01:26:55.640
liberalism.

665
01:26:55.640 --> 01:26:56.640
And I just wanted to ask if you have thoughts of what was going on.

666
01:26:56.640 --> 01:27:03.640
Being hijacked in some way by the socialists, because, for example, we've seen the John Stewart bill, sort of in the last year or two.

667
01:27:03.640 --> 01:27:08.640
Hans Hoppe has a chapter on democracy to go on the Fed, but he criticizes classical liberalism.

668
01:27:08.640 --> 01:27:11.640
And I just wanted to ask you if you have thoughts of what was going on.

669
01:27:11.640 --> 01:27:16.640
Hans Hoppe, the extremist?

670
01:27:16.640 --> 01:27:18.640
That's a great book, by the way.

671
01:27:18.640 --> 01:27:24.640
And let me just say, I think the Institute owes practically everything to Lew.

672
01:27:24.640 --> 01:27:30.600
We all owe, all of us owe a lot to Lew, among other things he came up with that title, and

673
01:27:30.600 --> 01:27:33.360
I think that title practically made the book.

674
01:27:33.360 --> 01:27:38.440
It's a take off on Arthur Kessler's, the book that Arthur Kessler wrote during the Cold War

675
01:27:38.440 --> 01:27:41.920
on Call the God that Failed about Communism.

676
01:27:41.920 --> 01:27:47.320
Anyway, I'm going to be talking about John Stuart Mill probably in my next talk.

677
01:27:47.320 --> 01:27:53.200
It's a very important point, and John Stuart Mill has a lot to answer for, and I think

678
01:27:53.200 --> 01:27:56.200
I think some of us are hoping that he's answering for it at this very moment.