World in the Grip of an Idea; C. Carson

278 ary socialism is intruded in such a way, particularly under long established parliamentary govern ments, that its restraints, confine ments, and erosions of the ground of liberty and property are not so read ily seen. This is so in part because as the paternal state takes shape the focus is upon benefits to be conferred rather than the price to be paid, both monetary and in individual rights. There is a broader reason than this, however. It is that the population, or a considerable portion of it, has been induced in advance of the measures to accept certain underlying ideas SWEDEN: TIGHTENING THE SCREWS 279 which make the intrusions appear plausible and, perhaps, even inevi table. One of the leading ideas is that of the desirability of distributive equality. This is joined, of course, with the notion that all should work together in collective harmony for the general good. When these ideas are linked to the belief that govern ment is the ·instrument by which this should be achieved the way has been prepared for. the introduction step by step of socialism.

The mechanism by which evolutionary socialism has been ad vanced is democracy. Herein lies a paradox. As popular control over government has increased the con trol by people over their own lives and affairs has declined. The paradox is more apparent than real. That anyone should find it strange that people's control over their lives declines as their participation in government increases is the result of one of the most impressive selling jobs in all of history. In the latter part of the nineteenth and in the twentieth century a tremendous selling of democracy took place. Democracy was advanced as the great cure for the ills of the world: if all peoples of the world would only adopt and practice it, a worldwide prosperi ty, harmony, and peace would ensue. The massive bloodlet ting which is now known as World War I was even described as a war to make the world safe for democ racy. Democracy would then, it was claimed, make the world safe from wars.

Coincidental Developments These ideas· gained plausibility from the fact that the development of democracy occurred more or less simultaneously with other develop ments in the nineteenth century. Such causal connection· as the spread of democracy had with these other de velopments was almost certainly ac cidental, but it did. not appear so at the time. The other nineteenth century developments to which I al lude were consti;tutionalism, the establishment of individual liberty, the casting off of feudal restrictions and the securing of private property, and the tendency to negotiate agree ments among nations rather than going to war to settle disputes. Under these conditions trade ex panded greatly, industries de veloped on an unprecedented scale, population increased dramatically, and prosperity began to become more general than ever before. It was under these conditions that Sweden became an industrial and prosperous country, as noted earlier.

In retrospect, there appears to be little enough reason to connect these developments with the spread of democracy. True, these develop ments occurred first generally in countries which had representative 280 THE FREEMAN May or popular government, that is, in Western Europe and America. And, there was undoubtedly a temporal connection between representative government and the other develop ments. It was this. The thrust to remove feudal and mercantile re strictions, to extend liberty, and to restrain and limit government was generally expressed through parli aments (legislatures, congresses, or whatever they might be called). This was especially so of the elective branches of parliaments. As a result of this, representative government began to be thought of as the cham pion of liberty. The connection was temporal, as I have said. For the historical mo ment, as it were, representative governments curtailed the power of kings and limited government. The foundation of liberty was in con stitutionalism which was itself based on the natural law philosophy. The practical defense of Iiberty lay in the separation of powers within gov ernment, a separation that would have the tendency to restrain and limit government. Popular or repre sentative government can, at best, only reflect the prevailing mood among the populace, whatever that may be. If that mood is libertarian, representative government may act upon it; if it is totalitarian, repre sentative government can do little more than be its agent.

Even so, the thrust toward democracy got a tremendous boost from this temporal, and temporary, con nection. Champions of democracy pressed to have governments more and more representative, to extend the franchise ever more broadly, and to having all political decisions made on the basis of popular sup port. The practical effect of this was to concentrate all power in the legis latures and to negate the restraints upon government that rested upon a separation of powers. In limited monarchies, such as Sweden and England, the monarch became more and more limited, as did the hereditary nobility generally, and the representative portions of parli aments triumphed. Democracy Is Mob Rule The champions of democracy ig nored the fundamental nature of democracy, a wealth of historical experience with it, and a two thousand-year-old reasoned argu ment against it. They made it an unquestioned good and a thing to be desired above all else.

Whatever the merits of represen tative government, they do not ex tend to a thoroughgoing democracy. It is an ancient insight that democ racy is mob rule. True, the mob-rule feature is moderated so long as the populace acts through representa tives; but representation is an inhibi tion on democracy, not a part of its essential character. It was Greek 1978 SWEDEN: TIGHTENING THE SCREWS 281 democracy which sentenced Soc rates to exile or death. It was the mob which shouted to Pontius Pilate that Christ should be crucified. It was the Roman mobs who turned their fickle support from one con quering general to another that aided and abetted the horrors of the Roman Empire. ttDemocratic" New England was the most intolerant locale in the American colonies. Democratic socialism has attempt ed to legitimize a modified mob rule. It has done so by attributing to democracy virtues it does not pos sess and ignoring its implicit vices.

If democracy were not modified by representation and rules which hold it in check it would be tyrannical. As it is, it is a compelled conformity, a conformity which takes away indi vidual liberty and intrudes upon pri vate property. It is ironic that so many intellec tuals should have championed social democracy (or democratic socialism or collectivized democracy, what ever describes it best). Modern intel lectuals developed an early distaste for social conformity. Ralph Waldo Emerson said that society is at war with every one of its members. His meaning was that society is trying to settle us into a groove-make us conform-that is contrary to what each of us as an individual would wish to be. Society became and re mains the villain for many intellec tuals. It operates upon the basis of tradition and bids those within its ranks, so to speak, to conform or suffer rebuke, ostracism, or what ever punishments are within its power. And conformity has been the bete noire of intellectuals.

Yet many of the same intellectu als who have condemned conformity to society have been vigorous pr~o moters of democracy, even demo cratic socialism. They have pro moted a compelled conformity by the use of government power over the conformity induced by influence of society. They avoided the onus of this by attributing goodness to de mocracy and claiming to identify society with government by way of democracy. If conformity were the evil, it might be supposed that com pulsory conformity would be worse than elective conformity. Conformity to Their View Actually, most intellectuals are no more opposed to conformity than are the generality of people. Each of us harbors in his breast the desire to have others conform to his will. What has troubled most intellectu als has not been conformity but rather kinds of conformity to which they are opposed and over which they have no control. Conformity to society, its norms and prescriptions, has been, in their view, irrational and backward. By their lights, they would substitute for conformity to tradition a conformity to reason, a 282 THE FREEMAN May reason that by their conceit they are uniquely equipped to divulge. The idea that has the world in its grip is a vision of just such a conformity.

The role of democracy in this needs also to be grasped. The theory of democracy holds that democratic government would actuate the will of the people. If this were the case, it is difficult to see how government action would· be brought under the control of intellectuals. What is more likely, however, isthat there is no such thing as a ~~will of the peo ple." True, majorities can often be obtained, either for men, or on one side or another of issues, especially if there is only one choice to be made. But the getting of a majority depends on how the issues are stated and the personal appeal' of candi dates. In short, the statement of is sues and the formulation of the can,. didate's opinions are crucial. These are pressure points for manipulat ing decisions in democracies.· They are the points occupied by intellec tuals. Democracy, then, is the means by which intellectuals. would exer cise control over and produce the kinds of conformity they desire.

It has been made to appear that, by voting, the individual increases his control over his affairs. This is only the case, however, ifhe success fully votes to reduce government in volvement in his affairs. If he. votes to increase government action, as he does if he votes for the programs of gradualist socialism, he votes to di minish his own control over his life and affairs. He may be induced to do this by the promise of benefits, bene fits which will free him from many of his individual responsibilities. But when he does this he is only voting himself greater responsibil ity for others and less control over how it will be exercised. Democracy in Sweden Sweden is one of the most demo cratic countries in the world. Not only is there universal suffrage but' also a great variety of consultative and mediative mechanisms by and through which people may express themselves. There is even an official known as an Ombudsman who has the power to penetrate and hold the bureaucracy to account. No group, at least organized group, is apt to be ignored when some decision is made which would affect its interests. Col lective decisions are a la mode in Sweden, and the Swedes have applied their passion for orderliness to see that as little as possible is done without consulting the collec tivity. All of which is just another way of saying that the Swedes have lost much of their individual liberty and control over their Iives and property. The screws on the indi vid ual which make him conform to the collective will are continually being tightened.

One of the most obvious ways in 1978 SWEDEN: TIGHTENING THE SCREWS 283 which Swedes individually have lost much of their control over their af fairs is by way of taxation. On the average, Swedish workers work over forty hours per week. According to reports, they work hard when they work; and pay in much of industry is on a piece work basis, which is cer tainly conducive to productivity. Local and national income taxes take away about a third of their pay on the average. Taxes rise sharply on those with higher incomes and go to as much as 71 per cent. The well to-do also pay a ((wealth" tax on top of the regular income, but there is, mercifully, a ceiling of 80 per cent on the combined national and local taxes on income. A general sales tax of 10 per cent on the cost of items bought prevails. In addition, unusually high taxes are levied on gasoline, liquor, beer, cigarettes, and chocolates, among other things. Technically, the pen sion fund is financed by employer contributions. In fact, of course, this payment is a wage cost and is a reduction of employee wages or em ployer income or both. This last aside, however, it is not uncommon for a workman to lose 50 per cent of his pay to direct taxes. Then there is the ubiquitous and invisible tax gatherer-inflation-, and Swedes have been hard hit by it as have most other peoples. Of course corpo ration profits are taxed, taxed, that is, if they are not placed in an investment fund, taxed at a rate of up to about 53 per cent of combined national and local levies.

It should be clear that the indi vidual loses personal control over all his money taken by taxation, whether direct or indirect. According to so cial democratic theory, the control over that portion lost by the individual passes over to the collectivity. The matter is not so simple, however, for so long as there is a choice people are by no means united as to how or whether the money should be taken and spent. For example, in the late 1950's, a major controversy de veloped in Sweden over the proposal by the Social Democrats for a sup plementary pension program. Fol lowing a national election in which the program was a major issue, the legislature passed the measure by a vote of 115 to 114. This was surely not the expression of a collective will but the imposition of a measure on the whole populace by the narrowest of majorities. The Housing Shortage Probably the best known infelicity of Social Democratic Sweden is its housing shortage. It is a good exam ple, too, of how the Swedes have lost effective control over their affairs and are thwarted in their aims by government policy. There are two aspects to the housing shortage. One is that there is a shortage of housing in places where it is wanted. The 284 THE FREEMAN May other is that the dwellings available are remarkably small. The majority of city dwellers live in apartments, and these generally run to 2% rooms each. One-fourth of urban dwellings have but one to two rooms.

Both kinds of shortage are a result of government practice and policy. Rent controls over many years have kept rents below what they would be in a free market. Hence, private builders have seen little advantage to be gained from building places for rent. A remoter reason for the short age of h0uses has been the rapid industrialization in the twentieth century. As a result more than 75 per cent of Swedes now live in towns and cities. There is reason to believe that this industrialization and ur banization has been accelerated by government policy which favors cap ital expenditure. It looks, too, as if the government were deliberately going about creat ing a housing shortage. Much urban housing has been demolished, under the claim that slums were being cleared away, but a goodly amount of this housing was quite habitable and much more commodious than the housing built to replace it. In any case, government determines what housing is provided. As one writer says, ((The government and local authorities erect a third of all new dwellings, and almost all hous ing projects are backed by govern ment loans. It is the government that decides on the number of hous ing starts each year, enforces build ing standards, and subsidizes pen sioners and low-income families to about 25 per cent of their rent."!

It is a result of government policy that apartments are so small. One aim of this policy is egalitarian, to see that every Swede has a ((quality" dwelling. To put it another way, if everyone cannot have a large house, then no one should have one. But the matter goes deeper than that. The government has, after painstak ing calculation and consideration, decided what sort of housing people need. It has decided what size and what components a kitchen should have. It has decided that central heat, double glazed windows, and garbage disposal chutes are needed rather than more space for rooms. It has set the kind of limitations on what is to be included so as to make it expensive to build very small ac commodations. Large families are almost unthinkable in the postage stamp houses, and Swedes must long for summer when they can get out of the stifling atmosphere of their houses into the open spaces.

Declining Population Sweden is in a squeeze from the make-up of the population, and no relief is in sight. The basic problem is that a larger and larger percent age of the population is reaching retirement age. The low birth rate is 1978 SWEDEN: TIGHTENING THE SCREWS 285 not replenishing the population. In consequence, a smaller and smaller work force is having to carry the burden of feeding and caring for that portion of the population that is re tired. The increase of productivity per worker might make it possible to continue for a while, but it should be noted that this could only be ac complished by denying to the work ers any benefits from the increased producti vity. Moreover, if earlier analysis is correct, government policies already encourage much wasteful capital spending, spending which may in deed increase the productivity of workmen but which requires much more work to replace the equipment being retired. About the only area in which the Swedes could move to enhance their productivity would be to use all the time that goes into social planning, consultation, negotiation, and other such ac tivities for productive purposes. But if they were to do so it would be to abandon democratic socialism.

The Swedes have invested a great deal of intelligence, ingenuity, and determination into making their va riety of socialism work. Of this, there should be no doubt. They have done so under as near optimum con ditions as are likely to be found on this planet. They have avoided par ticipation in wars that would have cost so much and returned so little of a material character. They had a homogenous population which should be ideal for collectivism. They have benefited much from international peace. They have avoided internal revolution, or any thing approaching it. They have modernized with great vigor, taken advantage of specialization of labor, and promoted capital accumulation and investment with a will. A Mechanical System The result of this effort and in genuity is this: The Swedes have probably come as close to creating a materialistic and mechanical sys tem as it would be possible to do.