To The Editor
Free vs. Unfree
Over the years, FEE’s activities have earned my trust. But it is much more than trust alone. FEE’s activities, particularly The Freeman, are a source of inspiration and hope for the future. South Africa must be one of the most over-governed countries around, with an entrenched statist regime. The writings from the Foundation have given me much ammunition in my, albeit small, “fight” for a free society.
The task ahead is immense, almost overwhelming, but the work to restore our liberty must go on. In South Africa the politicians would like us to believe the “battle lines” lie somewhere between the white and the black communities (or sometimes between Communist and Christian). But this is not so. The division is between those people believing in a free society and those supporting a regulated one—I suppose, as in most countries. Yet there are already many signs pointing the way to a better South Africa. There is much hope for the future. May the Foundation continue to prosper and carry on the good work.
Walter Kassier
Wandsbeck
Rep. of South Africa
Tribute to Mises
It was a pleasure to attend FEE’s recent seminar on liberalism (November 2-3) and to read the symposium on Liberalism by Ludwig von Mises in The Freeman (November). Mises was indeed a man alone, a heroic bat-tier on a barren intellectual landscape. His intellectual ability was remarkable, as was his unconquerable spirit and his uncompromising persistence in advocating his principles despite overwhelming odds. He was, as speaker Ralph Raico pointed out, a man who “could do no other.”
The seminar’s distinguished speakers paid eloquent tribute to both the economist and the man, but most moving of all were the taped remarks of Margit von Mises. Mrs. Mises observed that her husband was a “great humanitarian” who “lifted economic science out of a materialistic rut.” Mises “challenges the reader—not only to understand the economic principles involved in human action, but also to realize the full meaning of human action in terms of human welfare, and the fatal results for humanity if that lesson is not learned. All through his writings there is glowing evidence of his concern for his fellow human beings . . . . And there was always a challenge in his books for the readers to display the same persistence and courage that he himself displayed throughout his whole life.”
This FEE seminar both intensified its participants’ thirst for knowledge, and inspired them with an exemplar of human greatness.
David M. Brown
Syracuse, New York
Liberalism: “Old” and “New”
I read with considerable interest the symposium section in the November Freeman, “Classical Liberalism Re considered.” I found the various pieces quite instructive. I was surprised at one thing, however. Although the contributors clearly noted that “old-style” (19th century) liberalism is quite different from contemporary liberalism, the character of the change was not mentioned as clearly as it might have been.
The main distinction between “old” and “new” liberalism can be stated simply: classical liberalism em phasized the importance of liberty, whereas today’s liberalism is equality-centered, or egalitarian in character. Of related significance is the fact that classical liberalism sought to protect the individual from government tyranny, whereas modern liberalism generally seeks to protect individuals and groups from social injustice.
Precisely at what point “liberalism” began to change its emphasis is not clear to me, but two transition periods in the present century deserve careful consideration: the Progressive Era and the New Deal. One possible clue to this change in emphasis might be to notice which of our nation’s political leaders have been commonly described as “liberal” in their day.
Michael Bordelon
St. Thomas’ Episcopal School
Houston, Texas
A Liberal Social Order
The Freeman is to be commended for its recent symposium on classical liberalism. In particular, it is to be ap plauded for bringing to the attention of its readers the single best book on the subject—Ludwig Mises’ brilliant, but sadly all too often neglected, Liberalism.
The lesson taught us by Mises and his most famous student, F.A. Hayek, is that what is essential for the vitality and the cohesion of the free market social order is the free interplay of the unintended effects of freely chosen entrepreneurial and exchange activities of market participants. It is these unintended or second order effects that create an understandable and systematically functioning social order out of what otherwise might be seen as unrelated and, perhaps, even seemingly chaotic behavior.
The liberal social order needs no overseer, no outside planner, director or coordinator. The hallmark of liberal social theory was to recognize that the free society has within it a superbly sophisticated adaptive process which ensures its continuing self-ordering and system-wide coordination. Any coercive intervention into this free exchange process will lead only to a breakdown in social order and cohesion which is the very opposite of the benign, self-ordering, unintended effects produced by the freely operating voluntary exchange process.
To waver from this insight and from these fundamental principles is to risk the collapse of any civilized, humane, just, and prosperous social order. This is why it is so important that The Freeman continue its comprehensive and unrelenting advocacy of the freedom philosophy.
Walter Grinder
Institute for Humane Studies
Fairfax, Virginia
Much to Learn
I like the idea of letters to the editor very much and read them first when the November issue arrived. Unlike Robert T. Smith, writing in the November issue, I don’t try to read all the articles at one time but take them slowly and thoughtfully, often marking and underlining some phrases and paragraphs that I feel are especially significant. I have learned much that way and I further expect to learn something from the “Letters.”
Bob LeFevre used to write a brief comment to each letter he printed in his journal and I think this practice might enhance your new endeavor. It produces an interesting dialogue.
My best wishes for your continued success.
Ewald H. J. Stechholz
Rockville, Connecticut
Let us hear from you! We will share with readers the most interesting and provocative letters we receive. Letters may be edited for purposes of clarity or space. And opinions expressed are not necessarily those of The Freeman. Address your letters to: To the Editor, The Freeman, The Foundation for Economic Education, Irvington-on-Hudson, New York 10533.
