Book Reviews

As a libertarian, Mr. Paolucci believes in "leveling up" the popu lation of the U.S., which runs counter to the fashionable idea that taxation must be geared to the process of "leveling down." He is in favor of the "possessing classes," a phrase which he would undoubtedly throw in the face of Arth ur Schlesinger, who use,s similar phrases about the "haves" with a sneer. Mr. Paolucci thinks the Negroes should, in the words of William Graham Sumner, "get capital"; what they need more than anything else is self-respect, ,vhich is something that doesn't go with a life j spent on relief. As a non-WASP (his Italian ancestry obviously means that he can't very well be a "white Anglo-Saxon Protestant"), Mr. Paolucci is keenly aware of the battle which minorities have had to wage in this country to achieve financial status and a feeling of belonging. But this is the lot of minorities everywhere; it is, says Mr. Pao lucci, the human condition, and 61 62 THE FREEMAN January there is no use weeping about it.

The important thing is that, under the American form of govern ment, individuals can pull minori ties up. It has happened in the case of the Irish, the Germans, the Jews, and the Italians - and there is no reason why the Negro, coming north out of the agrarian south, can't "make it" in his prop er turn. In any case, says Mr. Pao lucci, it is not the business of gov ernment to force anybody to love anybody. The business of govern ment is to protect individuals in their rights. Law and Order Mr. Paolucci's libertarian streak does not lead him to embrace the fallacy of anarchism. He believes in the check-and-balance republic of James Madison. But he also be lieves in "we, the people" united behind the President when it comes to facing foreign threats or the bids of minorities to dis solve the federal union. The cen tral thought of his book is nailed down in a remarkable reply to Professor James MacGregor Burns, who, by implication, would welcome a diminution of U.S. sov ereignty lest a nuclear holocaust should "wipe out all checks and balances - including the voters."

Says Mr. Paolucci, "President Lincoln would have replied that a nuclear holocaust was less to be feared than peaceful dissolution \vhich would also wipe out checks and balances and with them the way of life that makes being a voter meaningful." The best things in life, says Mr. Paolucci, are those which men are prepared to die for, and it is no less true now than in ancient times that freedom is "made secure only when a sufficient number of persons who are willing to die rather than not be free combine their willing ness politically." If our federal union goes, checks and balances will check and balance nothing, the Constitution will constitute noth ing, and the civil rights of every body, the Negroes included, will be "deprived of positive value as well as legal substance." National Loyalties Mr. Paolucci, though as a liber tarian he could not very well think highly of Lyndon Johnson's do mestic views, rather admires the \vay in which a hard-grained Texas patriot decided to go against the academic liberals' conception of the White House as the place for a continuous "international ist" teachin. James MacGregor Burns, Walter Lippmann, Arthur Schlesinger, the earlier Walt Ros tow, all believed in a strong presi dency - but only when the Presi dent was under the tutelage of the internationalists. When LBJ 1969 A POWER FOR PEACE 63 turned out to be a different breed of cat than some of his predeces sors, all the "strong executive"

liberals started whooping it up for an even stronger U.S. Senate. The new idols were Fulbright, McCarthy, and other members of the Senate Foreign Relations Com mittee who wanted to take the conduct of foreign affairs out of the strong executive's hands. But if LBJ stood out against "national dissolution," his policies were still opaque when it came to considering basic balance·-of-power realities on the Atlantic side of the world. Walt Rostow, in the White House, might stand up for preserving the balance of power in East Asia. But he - along with Dean Rusk in the State Depart ment - had been for "conver gence" with the communists until the whole world was at a "take off" position to practice meliorist economics that would feed every body, the drones as well as the workers. The irony of the situa tion, as Mr. Paolucci sees it, is that Soviet Russia has, in practice, "turned Marx on his head" by creating, not a stateless paradise, but a tough supernationalistic State that will never accede to real disarmament. Moscow talks "in ternationalism" - but invades Czechoslovakia, arms communist nationalists such as Ho Chi Minh, and encourages the Arab nationalists who look to Nasser as their leader. To hope to build "interna tionalist" East-West bridges in this atmosphere is utopian.

Barbarians Within As for the utopia of One-World rule, Mr. Paolucci thinks it would be the prelude to disastrous civil wars on a pl~netary scale. The his tory of ancient Rome broods over many a page in Mr. Paolucci's book. When a balance of power existed in the Mediterranean world, Roman citizens did not fight each other. They maintained internal discipline in order to stand guard against external enemies. But after the single great enemy Carthage was destroyed, the Roman classes turned on each other. The civiI wars eventually came to an end, but the Roman Republic was insensibly trans formed into the Roman Empire. This "One World" of antiquity established a universal peace - but the energies of the population flagged. And, eventually, the bar barians broke in. Mr. Paolucci thinks this is the "law" of One Worldism. But in modern times the barbarians lurk within the advanced countries as well as in the jungles of some of the tropical "underdeveloped" world.

There are some things that are not cleared up in Mr. Paolucci's 64 THE FREEMAN January book. Would he regard the Clar ence Streit blueprint for a federa tion of the Atlantic democracies as a concession to a debilitating "internationalism," or would he accept it as a proposal for strengthening the West in its bal ance-of-power confrontation with the Soviet East? Does he think West Europe should remain a pre serve of "little nationalisms," or should it become a bigger federal entity with a possibly enhanced ability to live in a balance of power world? Before we can be clear on strategies to be pursued against the communists, the,re may be some arguing to do about the claims of Paul. Spaak, Clarence Streit, and other prophets of larger federal units. The question is whether countries such as Bel gium, France, and Italy have be come the "city states" of the mod ern Western world. It would be good to have Henry Paolucci turn his lucid mind to the consideration of where the thinking of James Madison can be applied to larger federal units. ~ A NOTE TO ADVERTISERS To THOSE who have helped themselves and the Foundation over the years through commercial advertising in THE FREEMAN, our deep appreciation. However, it has never been a Foundation prac tice to actively solicit such advertisements, our interest being primarily to explore and promote ideas on liberty.

With that in mind, we are henceforth discontinuing all outside or paid advertising, and will use the available space, as in this issue, to advise readers of special offers of books or programs or services directly related to the main purpose of the Foundation for Economic Education: an improved understanding and prac tice of the libertarian ideal. LEONARD E. READ, President the Freeman VOL. 19, NO.2. FEBRUARY 1969 From Spencer's 1884 to Orwell's 1984 Henry Hazlitt 67 In The Man Versus the State, Herbert Spencer warned prophetically of "the coming slavery" of oppressive taxation and government control. Our Saving Grace Paul L. Poirot 76 Despite powerful pressures to "live it up," we owe our lives to the long-standing habit of saving for a rainy day. The Rise and Fall of England: 12. The Fabian Program Clarence B. Carson 81 Describing the steps from municipal to national control of industry and trade.