Author's Note

I RECENTLY told a leading American economist that I was writing an essay on the concept of ‘the politically impossible’. He at once suggested a definition of the notion: ‘All the reforms which would be really worth while undertaking.’

His reaction was not entirely facetious. It reflects, I think, a frustration felt by many. If wise changes are indeed ruled out by ‘politics’ it is a damning criticism of the contemporary working of democracy. The problem is one of the most serious confronting the inheritors of western civilization today. In this essay I try to reveal some of the roots of the ‘impossibility’ which we so often hear alleged.

My thinking on this subject has been directly influenced by Morley’s classic, On Compromise, and two important articles by Professors Clarence Philbrook and Helmut Schoeck. Two recent works by Professor T W Hutchison have also greatly assisted me. I am grateful to Messrs Arthur Seldon and Ralph Harris of the IEA not only for criticism and ideas but for editorial assistance which has improved my exposition.

I have written this contribution while a Visiting Research Fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, and while occupying the post of Distinguished Visiting Professor of Economics at California State College at Hayward. I am indebted also to the Relm Foundation and the Principles of Freedom Committee for financial assistance and encouragement.

W H H

March 1971

Hoover Institution, Stanford, and

California State College, Hayward,

California, USA

¹Keynes and the Classics, Occasional Paper 30, IEA, 1969.