Freedom to Change; H. Callaway

For a long time, an undisputed article of faith widely held in this nation is that government can and must see to the needs of the peo ple. Among those who recognize that government is incapable of such a task, it should come as no surprise that the result of endless promises would be frustration and Mr. Callaway is pursuing graduate studies in philosophy at Temple University. 536 discontent. If people are told and come to believe that they have a right to the unearned, a right to "personal fulfillment," which then fails to materialize, small wonder that they become frustrated and sullen. There is, however, another source of the discontent and pes simism so prevalent today. Expec tations inflated out of all propor tions have lead to frustration, and this frustration has been increas ingly focused upon the political system in a demand for funda mental changes. The welfare state alone is not enough, they believe; thus, a more radical reorganiza tion of society will be required before various important goals can be achieved. Their demands for change in this direction have been resisted to some extent, which is the second source of discontent I mentioned. The advocates of col lectivism are attempting to change the "system" through various po litical means.

My point is that political means - ranging from party politics to mass rallies - cannot effectively bring about a reorganization of society. The people of this country are by no means of one mind in regard to the changes which the collectivist would like to see; so the problem is to change the minds of those who disagree. Such an ob jective, I think, cannot be accom1971 FREEDOM TO CHANGE 537 pUshed by political methods. It is possible, of course, to silence dis agreement and to intimidate ac tive resistance by political tech niques, but it cannot be done effectively in a society with rela tive freedom, where civil liberties persist. Political means, involving the use or threat of force and the at tempt to gain "power" or the legal right to use such force against others, will not change anyone's thinking. Thus, political tech niques bring about further frus tration when the objectives are fundamental intellectual and cul tural changes.

Where the rights of the individ ual are neither recognized nor re spected, politics is simply formal ized and legalized plunder. As Chairman Mao tells us, "political power proceeds from the barrel of a gun." This is the necessary re sult of ignoring man's nature, of ignoring man's rights. In a sim ilar way, the attempt to change society through political means, or through the use of force, what ever it might be called or in what ever form, is also an attempt to ignore man's nature. Man is the rational animal and all those cre ations which are specifically hu man are the product of the human mind. To be rational means to fol low the evidence available and according to the dictates of logic. Thus, the attempt to force a change in society treats those who must be coerced as less than hu man, as irrational beings. Through Voluntary Agreements The creation of civilization, of a rationally ordered society, is one of mankind's greatest achieve ments. Insofar as it has been achieved, it has been done through voluntary agreements among ra tional men. The great efficiency of capitalism springs from the fact that under such a system men are free to use their energies produc tively and to voluntarily associate with other men to create a freely chosen and dynamic order. The overt structure of civilization re flects this order in the form of those institutions within which men agree to cooperate. Obviously then, a free society, a human so ciety, cannot be created through the methods of politics, for there is a definite relationship between ends and means.

In view of the nature of a free society, those who advocate such a society must recognize that the methods for bringing it about must necessarily differ from polit ical methods developed and used by the advocates of collectivism. The greatest strength of a rela tively free society lies in the free and voluntary institutions which constitute its overt form. Free so588 THE FREEMAN September cieties are weakened by disorder and disruption in the same way and for the same reasons that the economy is weakened by any sort of intervention. Collectivism, on the other hand, breeds on the de cay of civilized, ordered institu tions. This is why power blocs, mass uprisings, demagoguery, and vicious rhetoric are such fit weapons for the establishment of any form of collectivism. Progress Toward Freedom Builds on the Voluntary Order The path toward freedom is en tirely different. Those who advo cate freedom must attempt to build upon the voluntary order of society rather than to weaken or destroy it. One must act in accord with man's nature as a rational being if anything human is to be accomplished. Claiming a right to defend oneself against looters is one thing. To think that physical force, whether openly or covertly employed, can create an atmo sphere conducive to a free society is quite another thing. The most efficient and practical way to im prove society is wide open to the serious student with a dedication to liberty. There can be no good society until there are good men, and the improvement of men is manifestly an intellectual project.

There are always those who call for "direct action," and "do it now." This can mean anything from getting involved in party politics to fomenting revolution. However, this urge springs from a basic misunderstanding of man and his potential. This urge ig nores man's intellectual nature, the ability of individuals and of men in general to improve them selves through the use of their minds. Freedom can only be pre served or extended if it becomes a vital issue which will engage the best minds in every field of endeavor. It is no accident that the concept of property rights has fallen into disrepute at a time when the term "intellectual" has come to be used as a synonym for "socialist." To understand the philosophical case for freedom is not merely a first step in a long march; such understanding sup plies the cultural underpinnings of society, and it is the entire battle. To change a society, requires a change in the way people think.

People may choose freedom, but this will not happen unless they come to see its value, see why they should abandon the philosophies and ideologies of collectivism. Armies of destruction may move on their bellies and political move ments on the strength of num bers; but man, insofar as he is human, is moved by the power of ideas. ~ Defining Povert~ HENRY HAZLITT ANY STUDY of poverty should log ically begin with a definition of the problem we are trying to solve. Precisely what is poverty? Of the thousands of books and articles on the subject that have appeared over the last two cen turies, it is astonishing how few have troubled to ask this question. Their wri ters have taken it for granted that both they and their readers knew precisely what was being discussed. Yet popularly the term is very vague. It is nearly always employed in a relative rather than an absolute sense. In Victorian England it became the fashion for some politicians to say that "the Rich and the Poor form Two Nations." But as every fam ily's income, if arranged on a scale according to its dollar amount, would probably form a dot on a continuous smooth curve, the diHenry Hazlitt is well-known to FREEMAN readers as author, columnist, editor, lecturer, and practitioner of freedom. This article will appear as a chapter in a forthcoming book, The Conquest of Poverty, to be published by Arling ton House.