On the Spread of (Classical) Liberal Ideas: Some Thoughts on Strategy”

 

Introduction

This is the first draft of an essay I wrote on libertarian strategies for achieving social change. A version of it, along with other notes and reflections, was turned into the Lead Essay for a Liberty Matters online discussion of “On the Spread of (Classical) Liberal Ideas” (March 2015) <http://oll.libertyfund.org/pages/lm-ideas>. I then reworked it for a paper I gave at the Southern Economics Association 2015 Annual Meeting (November 21–23, 2015) on "Entrepreneurs, Investors, and Scribblers: An Austrian Analysis of the Structure of Production and Distribution of Ideas".

 

Table of Contents

• Hayek’s Despair at the End of World War Two
• Laying the Groundwork for Discussion
• The Spread of Pro-Liberty Ideas in the Post-War Period
• Strategies for Achieving Radical Change
• Bibliography
• Endnotes

 

---

 

Hayek’s Despair at the End of World War Two↩

At the height of the war in 1944, when what had once been relatively free market societies had been turned into government planned and regulated war economies, the economist Friedrich Hayek penned a desperate warning - if such heavy planning, regulation, and taxation was not soon brought to an end England and America were well and truly “on the road to serfdom”.[1] He followed this up 5 years later with an essay, “The Intellectuals and Socialism” which has become a kind of gospel for libertarian and free market groups ever since as they grappled with the sad fact that they were in such a small minority while all around them, other intellectuals and scholars were socialists and interventionists of various kinds. I remember vividly in the 1970s when I first became involved with these ideas, we used to wonder how to convince our friends and colleagues what a wonderful thing individual liberty really was, a veritable “liberal utopia”, as Hayek eloquently phrased it:

Does this mean that freedom is valued only when it is lost, that the world must everywhere go through a dark phase of socialist totalitarianism before the forces of freedom can gather strength anew? It may be so, but I hope it need not be. Yet, so long as the people who over longer periods determine public opinion continue to be attracted by the ideals of socialism, the trend will continue. If we are to avoid such a development, we must be able to offer a new liberal program which appeals to the imagination. We must make the building of a free society once more an intellectual adventure, a deed of courage. What we lack is a liberal Utopia, a program which seems neither a mere defense of things as they are nor a diluted kind of socialism, but a truly liberal radicalism which does not spare the susceptibilities of the mighty (including the trade unions), which is not too severely practical, and which does not confine itself to what appears today as politically possible. We need intellectual leaders who are willing to work for an ideal, however small may be the prospects of its early realization. They must be men who are willing to stick to principles and to fight for their full realization, however remote. The practical compromises they must leave to the politicians. Free trade and freedom of opportunity are ideals which still may arouse the imaginations of large numbers, but a mere “reasonable freedom of trade” or a mere “relaxation of controls” is neither intellectually respectable nor likely to inspire any enthusiasm.

The main lesson which the true liberal must learn from the success of the socialists is that it was their courage to be Utopian which gained them the support of the intellectuals and therefore an influence on public opinion which is daily making possible what only recently seemed utterly remote. Those who have concerned themselves exclusively with what seemed practicable in the existing state of opinion have constantly found that even this had rapidly become politically impossible as the result of changes in a public opinion which they have done nothing to guide. Unless we can make the philosophic foundations of a free society once more a living intellectual issue, and its implementation a task which challenges the ingenuity and imagination of our liveliest minds. But if we can regain that belief in the power of ideas which was the mark of liberalism at its best, the battle is not lost. The intellectual revival of liberalism is already underway in many parts of the world. Will it be in time?[2]

Nearly 70 years later, we have less reason to be as pessimistic as Hayek was then as we have witnessed in the meantime a significant growth of free market and libertarian individuals, groups, institutes, books, journals, and even rap videos. However, as historically aware individuals we know that this has not been the first time that a pro-liberty movement has emerged, that previous attempts to build a free society were attempted, were partly successful, and that many of them failed and sank into oblivion. Will this happen as well to the current movement? Can we learn from the past, both how the successes were achieved, why they failed, and what might make for another successful movement in the future.

This Liberty Matters discussion follows on from two earlier ones: one in November 2013 on “Arthur Seldon and the Institute of Economic Affairs” and another in January 2015 on “Richard Cobden: Ideas and Strategies in Organizing the Free-Trade Movement in Britain”.[3] In those discussions we wanted to study in greater detail a couple of specific examples of how pro-liberty ideas were developed and then used to bring about political and economic change in a pro-liberty direction. The first study was how Arthur Seldon and Ralph Harris began the Institute of Economic Affairs in post-war Britain (1955), developed a research and publication program to disseminate these ideas, and how these ideas gradually came to influence politicians like Margaret Thatcher in the 1980s. The second study examined how Cobden was able to organise one of the most successful single issue movements in the modern history of liberty, namely the repeal in 1846 of the protectionist Corn Laws in England. What I would like to do in the present discussion is to broaden the scope of our analysis to include other movements in the past which have sought to bring about a freer society, especially those movements which achieved this goal.

What I would like to do in this opening salvo of the discussion is to lay the groundwork in an expansive and rather open-ended way, firstly by listing a large number of general questions about how societies change, and the role which ideas and individuals play in bringing about that change; secondly, by listing the (surprisingly) large number of historical examples of radical intellectual and political change over the past 2,000 year (both in a pro-liberty and anti-liberty direction), along with some of the key individuals and events involved; and finally, a list of some of the institutions, individuals, and events which have arisen to further the cause of liberty since Hayek wrote his appeal for intellectuals to rediscover the utopian promise of liberty. I hope the other contributors to this discussion will help me flesh out these lists so they are more complete.

In the next section, I would like to offer an analysis of intellectual and social change based upon the Austrian theory of the structure of production, in which the production of ideas replaces that of the production of goods. I will argue that, just as in the real economy, a pro-liberty movement requires the creation of raw materials (liberal theory), investors who will provide funding, entrepreneurs who can identify profit opportunities and organise production, a salesforce who can persuade consumers to buy the product, and of course consumers to buy the product.

In the final section is a brief discussion of what most classical liberal and libertarian intellectuals and scholars have largely avoided thinking about in any depth, namely developing strategies for achieving radical intellectual and political change based upon their knowledge of history, economics, and the science of human action. I conclude with a half-serious, half-lighthearted list of the various strategies which have been adopted over the centuries to achieve a free society. I hope my fellow discussants will be able and willing to add to the list!

Laying the Groundwork for Discussion↩

I - Some Questions to Consider

Here are a number of general questions to consider about how societies change, and the role which ideas and individuals play in bringing about that change:

1. how are ideas about liberty (political, economic, legal, and social) developed and how do they spread?
   1. among the intellectual elite?
   2. among ordinary people?
2. what role does new technology play in this process?
3. what role do individuals play? (great thinkers, charismatic leaders, ordinary people in the street)
4. who are the vested interests who oppose change in a pro-liberty direction?
   1. how powerful are they?
   2. how do they exercise their power?
   3. how do they justify their power and position to the broader community?
   4. how effectively do they control what can and cannot be discussed? how do they maintain “cultural hegemony”?
   5. can they be persuaded to give up their privileges? can they be bought off? if neither of these, what next?
5. what groups are interested in change in a pro-liberty direction?
   1. why do they wish to charge the status quo? for ideological reasons? personal profit?
   2. how do they organise themselves?
   3. what strategies did they use in order to bring about this change?
   4. how did they go about undermining the “ideological hegemony” of the ruling elites?
   5. how successful were they?
6. what role do institutions play in protecting the old order? creating the foundation for a new order?
7. what are the relative costs and benefits of remaining within the old order?
   1. of creating a new order?
   2. how do these relative costs change over time?
8. what are the relative costs and benefits of organising dissent against the old order?
   1. or the old order repressing that dissent?
   2. how do these costs and benefits change over time?
9. how successful have been “top down” (elite) attempts at reform? how successful have been “bottom up” (popular) reforms?
10. what role has violent revolution played in achieving a freer society? what are the costs and benefits of violent revolution?
11. what role has gradual evolution played in bringing about a freer society? what are the costs and benefits of gradual evolution? who do these compare to the costs and benefits of revolution?
12. what is the relationship between changing ideas and changing politics? how long does it take for new and radical ideas to go from conception to inception?
13. what role do institutional crises (wars, economic depressions) play in hastening or hindering change in a pro-liberty direction?
14. is Marx/Lenin correct in arguing that revolutionary change requires both suitable “objective conditions” (political, economic crisis) as well as suitable “subjective conditions” (change in ideas and values)?
    1. for classical liberals what are the required objective and subjective conditions for successful change?
15. are there any common characteristics which define a “successful” pro-liberty movement? what are they and can they be replicated?

II - Some Historical Examples

Here are some historical examples of successful radical change in ideas and political/economic structures, in both a pro-liberty and anti-liberty direction. For more details see my own “Study Guides on the Classical Liberal Tradition”[4] as well as Jim Powell’s excellent The Triumph of Liberty: A 2,000-Year History (2000) and Steve Davies’ “Introduction” to the The Encyclopedia of Libertarianism (2008).[5] The articles in the Encyclopedia of Libertarianism on key individuals and historical movements are also essential reading (see bibliography for a full list).[6]

I also include where appropriate the names of some key individuals, texts, and events:

1. the spread of Christianity
   1. the role of Paul and his Epistles
   2. role of voluntary churches and congregations
   3. the role of state, established churches
2. the Reformation (Luther, Calvin)
   1. Martin Luther’s translation of the bible 1522, 1534
   2. Johannes Gutenberg and the printing press
3. the Leveller movement in the 1640s
   1. the outpouring of political pamphlets during the 1640s
   2. the overthrow of the Stuart Monarchy
   3. the establishment of a constitutional monarchy in 1688
4. the Enlightenment
   1. Diderot and the Encyclopedia in the 18thC
   2. the Physiocrats (Turgot’s reform efforts 1774)
5. the American Revolution
   1. the book seller Thomas Hollis (spread of Lockean and Commonwealthman ideas)
   2. Tom Paine’s Common Sense
   3. the Declaration of Independence (1776)
   4. The Federalist papers (1788)
6. the French Revolution
   1. the freeing of the French peasants (4 Aug. 1789)
   2. the Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen (1789)
7. the anti-slavery movement
   1. in Britain (against the slave trade 1808 and then abolition in 1833)
   2. in France 1794, 1848
8. the Free Trade Movement
   1. Cobden and the Anti-Corn Law League 1838–46
   2. the Cobden-Chevalier Treaty 1860
9. the Abolitionist movement in the US
   1. Garrison’s The Liberator 1831
   2. The American Anti-Slavery Society 1833–34
10. the freeing of the serfs in central and eastern Europe
    1. in Austria-Hungary (Bauernbefreiung) (1848)
    2. in Russia (1861)
11. the granting of legal and electoral rights to women
    1. JS Mill, On the Subjection of Women (1869)
    2. the right to vote campaigns in the UK and America
12. the formation of the Liberal Party in England (1859)
    1. Prime Ministership of William Gladstone, 1868–74; 1880–85; 1892–94
13. the rise of socialism in the late 19th century
    1. Fabian socialism in England
    2. Social Democracy in Europe)
14. Progressivism in early 20thC America
15. the Bolsheviks and the Russian Revolution 1910s
16. Hitler and the Nazi Party in the 1920s
17. Keynesianism in the 1930s
18. Gandhi and organised passive resistance in the Indian independence movement
19. the rise of the Welfare state in post-war Europe and US
20. the Civil Rights movement in the US in the 1950s and 1960s
21. the Anti-Vietnam War movement in the US in the 1960s
22. market reforms in Communist China 1978
23. the collapse of the Soviet Union and the Eastern Bloc 1989–91

The Spread of Pro-Liberty Ideas in the Post-War Period↩

Closer to our own time, we can also point to several examples of the successful spread of pro-liberty ideas in the post-Second World War period. I think we can identify four waves or generations of pro-liberty organizations and groups which were founded during this period to confront particular issues at particular times but which also shared the more general goal of spreading knowledge about individual liberty and free markets. See, Brian Doherty’s Radicals for Capitalism (2007) for details[7] and the relevant articles in The Encyclopedia of Libertarianism. These groups organised by “generations” include the following:

First Generation - the 1940s

• Ludwig von Mises’ seminar at NYU: the beginnings of the Austrian school of economics in America
• the formation of the Mont Pelerin Society immediately after WW2 (1947), Hayek & Friedman et al.: the remnants of classical liberals in academia gather in Switzerland; the beginnings of a revival and rebirth of the trans-Atlantic classical liberal movement[8]
• the formation of the Foundation for Economic Education in 1946 by Leonard Read: the popularisation of free market ideas; the Bastiat translation project (1964)
• the transformation of the William Volker Fund (1947) into a supporter of free market ideas: support for Mises at NYU, Hayek at Chicago, Rothbard during 1950s

One might also mention here other events which were taking place at the same time which were not directly the result of libertarian initiatives:

• the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (1947) - which began a general post-war reduction in tariffs in the post-war period

Second Generation - the 1950s & 1960s

• formation of the Institute for Economic Affairs 1955 by Anthony Fisher; joined by Ralph Harris in 1957 and Arthur Seldon in 1958: production of policy papers to influence government legislation in free market direction; 177 “Hobart Papers” have been published as of Dec. 2014[9]
• the success of Ayn Rand’s novels (Atlas Shrugged, 1957) and the rise of the Objectivist movement: with cumulative sales in the millions Rand’s novels have brought free market and individualist ideas to ordinary people
• the Center for the Study of Public Choice was established by James M. Buchanan and G. Warren Nutter in 1957 and has been associated with a number of universities since then (the University of Virginia 1957, Virginia Tech 1969, George Mason University in 1983): along with Milton Friedman and the Chicago school, and the Austrian school of Mises and Rothbard, it is the other major source of free market economic thinking.
• the creation of Liberty Fund in 1960 by Indiana lawyer and businessman Pierre Goodrich: policy of bringing back into print classics of the free market tradition which had gone out of print; organising conferences to encourage academics to discuss individual liberty
• the creation of the Institute for Humane Studies in 1961 by F.A. Harper: organises seminars for college students and awards scholarships for graduate study (Claude Lamb Fellowships).
• The Reason Foundation was created in 1968: publishes Reason magazine

Third Generation - the 1970s & 1980s

• the formation of the American Libertarian Party by David F. Nolan in 1971
• the Fraser Institute, modelled on the British IEA was established in Vancouver, Canada in 1974 by Michael Walker and T. Patrick Boyle, assisted by Anthony Fisher: Canadian public policy
• Friedrich Hayek wins the Nobel Prize for economics in 1974; Milton Friedman in 1976
  • in 1980 Friedman worked on a 10 part TV documentary series “Free too Choose” which was broadcast by the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS); a follow up best-selling book was co-authored with Rose Friedman.
• Centre for Independent Studies founded in 1976 by Greg Lindsay, modelled on IEA: Australian public policy, the liberty movement is now trans-Pacific
• Cato Institute began as the Charles Koch Foundation in 1974 by Ed Crane, Murray Rothbard, and Charles Koch; in July 1976, the name was changed to the Cato Institute: American public policy;
• The Center for Libertarian Studies (CLS) was founded in 1976 by Murray Rothbard and Burton Blumert: its aim is to foster libertarian scholarship through the Libertarian Scholars Conferences, the Journal of Libertarian Studies (1977 to 2000). Now defunct.
• The Mercatus Center was founded by Rich Fink as the Center for the Study of Market Processes at Rutgers University in ???. It moved to George Mason University in the mid–1980s and changed its name to the Mercatus Center in 1999: American public policy
• Atlas Economic Research Foundation (now The Atlas Network) was founded by Antony Fisher in 1981: it is a “meta-organisation” since its purpose is to help create other free market policy foundations throughout the world
• the Ludwig von Mises Institute was established in 1982 by Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr., Burton Blumert and Murray Rothbard: organises conferences, seminars, and publishes books to promote Austrian economics
• James M. Buchanan wins the Nobel Prize for Economics in 1986
• The Institute for Justice was founded in 1991 as a non-profit libertarian public interest law firm in the United States: supports key legal challenges in the American legal system

One might also mention here other events which were taking place at the same time which were partly the result of libertarian initiatives:

• the Prime Ministership on Margaret Thatcher 1979–90[10]
• the presidency of Ronald Reagan 1981–89
• the rediscovery of ideas about the free market and limited government in Eastern Europe after the fall of the Soviet Union

Fourth Generation - the 2000s

• the explosion of free market economics blogs such as Econlog, Cafe Hayek, Marginal Revolution, etc.
• FreedomFest established in 2002 by Mark Skousen: aimed at the general public and the broader libertarian movement
• the Online Library of Liberty was established by liberty Fund in 2004: making classics wrks of the free market and classical liberal tradition freely available to the public for educational purpsoes
• The Bastiat Society was founded in 2004 in Charleston, SC by Walter LeCroy and Ben Rast: a discussion forum for professional and self-employed individuals who are interested in free markets and individual liberty
• Students for Liberty founded in 2008 by Alexander McCobin and Sloane Frost: designed to link college students and campus activists throughout the world
• Ron Paul’s bid for president in 2008, 2012: promoted free market ideas, non-interventionist foreign policy, and Austrian economics; appealed to students and younger voters

Strategies for Achieving Radical Change↩

Hayek vs. Rothbard

There has been surprisingly little analysis by classical liberals and libertarians of past movements for intellectual and political change and what they might teach us in the present. One might well ask, where is our Gramsci? Friedrich Hayek outlined his strategy for promoting liberal and free market ideas in “The Intellectuals and Socialism” based upon his analysis of how socialism had become so successful in his lifetime. This essay has been enormously influential in guiding the activities of the Liberty Fund and the Institute for Humane Studies, amongst other institutions. It was written at a time when classical liberals ideas and movement were particularly weak following WW2 and Hayek reflects this with his short term pessimism and very long-term prognosis about the role of intellectuals in changing the climate of opinion. Remember, he had only recently published the warning The Road to Serfdom in 1944.

The libertarian economist Murray Rothbard, beginning in the mid–1970s, has given much thought to the problem of strategy but his work is not well known. His ideas need to be taken seriously because the rise of the modern libertarian movement to a large degree took place in NYC in the 1950s and 1960s (Mises seminar at NYU, the Rand salon, the Circle Bastiat, his and Liggio’s activities in the anti-Vietnam war movement, the first libertarian scholars conference, the formation of the Libertarian Party, etc) and as a participant in those events his observations should carry some weight. In an unpublished and “strictly confidential” manuscript from April 1977[11] he goes into some detail about the strategies used in the past to achieve radical change, ranging from libertarian movements like the American Revolution, the Philosophic Radicals around James Mill,[12] and Garrison and the abolitionist movement;[13] to totalitarian groups like the Lenin and the Bolsheviks, and the Nazi Party. He advises for the libertarian movement the creation of a Leninist style “cadre” of committed and knowledgeable individuals who understand both the theory of liberty as well as how it might be implemented in practice in the political world. It should be noted that Rothbard wrote this memorandum at a time when he hoped to turn the fledgling Libertarian Party into one modelled on his theory of “cadres” before he split acrimoniously with Koch and the Cato Institute and then gave up the idea of shaping the LP in his Millian-Leninist image. In spite of this political failure, his historical and theoretical reflections in my view still deserve attention by historians and political theorists. To answer the question Lenin himself asked in 1902 “What is to be done?”, we can say that we need more case studies of successful ideological movements, especially pro-liberty ones, like the ones I have listed above.[14]

Rothbard’s writings on strategy provoked several discussions both inside and outside the Libertarian Party, such as the shortened version which was published for the “Rothbard Caucus” of the Libertarian Party “Strategies For A Libertarian Victory”,[15] and the special edition of Libertarian Review (Aug. 1978) entitled “Toward the Second American Revolution: Libertarian Strategies for Today” which included essays on strategy by Milton Mueller, Murray Rothbard, Ed Crane, Leonard Liggio, Charles Koch, Bill Evers, and David Theroux.[16]

Rothbard’s strategic theory might be pursued at greater length in a future post in this discussion, especially his Millian-Leninism and its appropriateness for a movement based upon individual liberty, free markets, and individual responsibility.

Some Observations from History about Strategy

What I have found useful in studying this matter is Austrian capital theory developed by Hayek and Mises,[17] in particular the notion of “the structure of production of goods” - if we understand in this context that “goods” are “intellectual goods” or ideas and not raw materials or machinery. Before we can distribute goods to consumers (first order goods) we have to have a structure of production of goods ranging from the highest order (such as raw materials), to various intermediate orders (such the production of machines for factories, the factories which produce the final goods, and the trucks and logistics to get the goods to their final destination), and then the shops on main street which sell the final order of goods to consumers. For this structure of production of goods to exist, we need investors with a low time preference who are willing to invest their capital in the various stages, we need entrepreneurs who can bring together the funds, skilled personnel, and managerial talent to produce the appropriate goods at each stage of production, and we need a sales force who can persuade consumer to buy their particular product from among all the others goods made by competitors.

When we apply this analysis to the spread of classical liberal ideas it becomes apparent that a successful movement needs all of the following types of individuals and activities:

• individuals who are capable of supplying the intellectual raw materials (the theory of liberty as applied to economics, politics, and society)
• investors who are willing to provide the financial means for these ideas to be produced and distributed to others
• entrepreneurs who can identify a market opportunity (a “strategic issue”) and can organise all the components needed for the production and distribution of ideas for different types of markets (scholarly, general interest, education, mass market)
• a salesforce (marketers, advertisers, salespeople) who can persuade the consumers of ideas to buy this particular product in a competitive market for ideas
• consumers who buy our products (ideas)

One might ask, might the state distort this structure of the production of ideas, just as it distorts the investment of capital in the structure of production of economic goods by manipulating interest rates and the money supply? I do not have space to go into this question here, other than to suggest that the biggest distortion it creates is the supply of government schools and universities which “crowd out” both private suppliers of educational services, but perhaps more importantly, crowds out “unwelcome ideas” which support the free market and individual liberty.

From what I have said above I believe we can identify the following patterns in the way pro-liberty advocates have organised their activities in the past. Not all groups have proceeded in this way but they have used various components in their efforts and historians and social theorists might be able to construct a better model for intellectual and social change in the future by studying their activities.

The First Steps

• “gather the Remnant” - there is a need to identify and find like-minded people
• find investors who are willing to fund long term intellectual and political activities

Promote liberal scholarship (highest order production of ideas)

• encourage and fund highly original theorists (Mises, Hayek, Rothbard)
• place scholars in colleges and universities
• publish books, articles, hold conferences
• provide scholarships for interested students
• start graduate programs for scholars and future teachers

Create centres and institutes to disseminate liberal ideas among intellectuals, journalists, and political elites (middle/second order of production of ideas)

• public policy groups which criticise existing government policies and offer alternatives
• produce monographs and policy proposals showing how to liberalise the economy
• produce magazines, organise talks, write op ed pieces for newspapers, appear on TV

Create associations, organisations, parties to agitate and lobby for liberal change (first order)

• outreach to voters, students, and activists
• intellectual material which is suitable for the average educated reader
• create single issue lobby groups to put pressure on government to repeal legislation
• campus organisations
• organise direct action to oppose unjust laws

One Historical Example: The Anti-Corn Law League

I would now like to show how this “structure of the production of ideas” can be applied to a specific historical case study, namely the Anti-Corn Law League (ACLL) 1838–1846.[18]

(Highest) Fourth Order: the intellectual groundwork for free trade was done by Adam Smith in his treatise The Wealth of Nations (1776). This theoretical work was continued by many other classical economists in the early part of the 19th century like David Ricardo, James Mill, and J.R. McCulloch where the idea of free trade became a core component of the classical school of economics.

Third Order: Other classical economists and intellectuals gave lectures and wrote books and pamphlets on free trade; People like Thomas Hodgskin gave lectures to popular audiences at Mechanics Institutes and published books; Thomas Peronnet Thompson wrote books and pamphlets for middle brow audiences.

Second Order: Members of the Board of Trade had become influenced by Smithian free market ideas, there were sympathetic MPs in the Conservative Party who were prepared to argue in favour of free trade in the House of Commons and to vote for the repeal of the Corn laws, the Prime Minister Sir Robert Peel was won over to the free trade cause and organised a vote on it. Wilson started The Economist magazine to promote free trade ideas.

First Order: Cobden’s and the ACLL’s genius was to see how ordinary people could be organised to put pressure on the government. The ACLL realised that the recent dramatic drop in the price of postage (the Penny Mail) meant that they could distribute their printed material at a much lower cost than previously. He created membership cards for the ACLL so people could show their allegiance; envelopes for personal letters with ACLL designs and slogans were sold (merchandising); bazaars were held to sell other ACLL merchandise; signature drives were orgnised to demonstrate the scale of public support to MPs; large public meetings were held; there was wide distribution of magazine and pamphlets. [19]

I do not believe that this structure of production of ideas was a deliberate creation of any one of the individuals involved in the free trade movement. It seemed to have evolved without a great deal of conscious strategic planning. According to my schema we can identify the following key roles:

• the creator of the “raw materials”: Adam Smith in his treatise The Wealth of Nations, and his followings in the Classical school of economics
• the investors: Richard Cobden and his fellow cotton manufacturers who funded the organisation
• the entrepreneurs: Cobden was very good at identifying legislative opportunities for the free traders, and showed great skill in designing the best way to market the ideas to the general public (the symbol of the “big loaf” vs. “the small loaf”; James Wilson who founded The Economist magazine in 1843 to spread free market ideas
• the salesforce: lecturers like Hodgskin, Thompson; politicians like Villiers and Cobden who gave speeches in the house; the journalists who wrote articles the magazine The League
• the consumers: those ordinary people who voted for free trade candidates; signed petitions to parliament; attended large public meetings in support of free trade

The question we might ask ourselves, is whether or not a structure of the production of ideas like this is necessary for any significant intellectual and social/political/economic change to occur? How many examples can we find from history where something like this structure appeared, and how many took place without this kind of structure? If we can, how do explain the creation, dissemination, and impact of ideas in those cases?

A further question to consider is how long it takes for ideas to move from the Highest Fourth Order or stage of high theory production to the First Order or stage where the ideas get put into practice and pro-liberty reforms are enacted? In the case of free trade there was a 70 year period between the publication of Smith’s Wealth of Nations (1776) and the repeal of the Corn Laws in 1846. Is this a typical time frame? What other examples can historians find?

One might get depressed if one counted the years since the appearance of Mises’ Human Action in 1949 and the current state of monetary and banking policy in the West - some 65 years. On the other hand, the appearance of Rothbard’s For a New Liberty in 1974 and the ensuing growth of the modern libertarian movement over the following 40 years might give one cause to be more optimistic.

A final question to consider is to compare the success of classical liberals in England in abolishing slavery (1808 and 1833) and repealing the protectionist Corn Laws (1846) with the failure of liberals to do the same in the United States. There, the slave trade was ended but slavery itself proved to be a much harder nut to crack and the sad conclusion one might have to make is that ideological and political agitation was not enough to overcome the vested interests of the slaveowners and the apathy of the voting public, and that slavery only ended as a result of a very violent and destructive war. The failure of the American free traders is another example which needs to be studied in greater detail. Jean-Baptiste Say’s free trade ideas in his Treatise (English translation 1821) were taught in American colleges for decades but this did not produce a broadly based free trade movement (although there was an American Free Trade Association with branches in Chicago and New York which republished many of Bastiat’s free trade writings) and the U.S. remained a protectionist nation for the entire 19th century with some of the highest rates of tariffs in the world.[20] So on two counts, on issues which practically defined what it meant to be a classical liberal at this time - free trade and opposition to slavery - the U.S. liberals were found wanting and failed.

Outstanding Examples of Key Roles and Activities

In this section I want to pull out some of the best examples I know of each of the key types of figures involved in the process I have described above:

• investors
  • Harold Luhnow and the William Volker Fund
  • Antony Fisher and IEA and Atlas[21]
  • Pierre Goodrich and Liberty fund[22]
  • Charles Koch and Cato Institute and other groups
• entrepreneurs
  • Thomas Clarkson: the British Anti-Slavery movement
  • Guillaumin: the French political economists
  • Richard Cobden: the English free trade movement
  • Arthur Seldon and Ralph Harris: the IEA in London
  • Leonard Read: FEE
  • Baldy Harper: IHS
  • Antony Fisher: IEA and Atlas
  • Ed Crane: Cato Institute
• salespeople
  • Ayn Rand: best-selling novels
  • Milton Friedman: “Free to Choose” TV series and book
  • Ron Paul: presidential campaigns

book publishing

• the Guillaumin publishing firm
• Liberty Fund

policy papers

• IEA (177 Hobart Papers have been published as of Dec. 2014)

magazines (two of the longest lived magazines)

• The Freeman (FEE)
• Reason

From Retreatism to Cadre-Building and Beyond

I will conclude by listing some of the main strategies which have been adopted by classical liberals/libertarians over the years in the hope that it may provoke further thought and discussion:

1. Taoist Retreatism - the Taoists of ancient China realised they had no chance of changing the world so they decided to live good personal lives, retreat from the world, and watch it go by towards inevitable decline.

2. Nockian preservation of The Remnant - in the 1920s and 1920s older style American conservatives like Albert Jay Nock thought there was only “The Remnant” left and that they were writing for them almost exclusively while they waited for the movement to revive sometime in the distant future.

3. Libertarian Monasticism - The strategy is to keep the old texts alive for another generation who might eventually do something with them. Thus, classic texts are brought back into print or put online. Similar to Nockian Remnantism.

4. Civil Disobedience - the 16th century French magistrate Etienne de la Boétie thought that if one could convert a sufficient number of people to voluntarily withdraw their support for the coercive state, then it would inevitably collapse. A version of this was actually put into practice by the Indian lawyer Mahatma Gandhi in the Indian independence movement in the 1940s.

5. Converting the Monarch - also known as “enlightened despotism”, the French Physiocrats in the 18thC took the “reform from the top down” approach whereby they attempted to convert the ruling monarch of the day to adopt liberal reforms. For example, Turgot and his edicts of 1774–76. They ran into problems when the king died or changed his mind. “Thatcherism” might be included in this category as well, with Keith Joseph reprising the role of Turgot and Thatcher that of Louis XVI.

6. Converting the Senior Bureaucrats - free market inspired bureaucrats advise the ruler to introduce economic reforms in order to make the state/military stronger or to avoid revolution from below. Examples include the Austria-Hungary Emperor deciding to abolish serfdom in 1848; and the Russian Tsar Alexander II abolishing serfdom in 1861; and the Chinese communist leader Deng Xiaoping who introduced sweeping market reforms in China in 1978.

7. Millian Leninism - James Mill organised the Philosophic Radicals like Lenin did the Bolshevik Party (according to Rothbard). He was quite ruthless in his campaign to introduce electoral reform and end the power of the “sinister interests” in 1832.

8. Rothbardian Leninism - Rothbard was inspired by Mill and Lenin to introduce his own theory of “building cadres” within the Libertarian Party in the late 1970s.

9. Hayekian Educationism - Liberty Fund and other non-profit groups have been inspired by Hayek’s “The Intellectuals and Socialism”. The strategy is not to engage politicians and voters directly but to influence others (intellectuals, scholars, judges, teachers) who will in turn eventually influence the direction of political and economic reform.

10. Gramscian war against ideological hegemony - follow the Italian Marxist theorist Antonio Gramsci’s strategy of undermining the “cultural hegemony” of the ruling class by exposing its criminality and ridiculing it, and creating an alternative “culture” for ordinary people outside of the state

11. Third Partydom - e.g. the Libertarian Party. Since the other 2 major parties are so solidly statist, a new third party must be created in order to agitate for more free market reforms from within the existing party controlled Legislature.

12. Reverse Fabianism - Policy groups such as IEA and the Cato Institute attempt to influence the policies of the existing parties. Part of the strategy is to move close to London/Washington in order to hold conferences, book launches, write op ed pieces for the key newspapers read by the political elites, and to participate in Congressional briefings in order to persuade members of the existing parties and their lobbyists to adopt a more libertarian line.

13. Younger Generationism - the IHS and FEE and Students for Liberty. IHS has designed educational programs for young would-be scholars, journalists, filmmakers, think-tankers who will go out into the world and begin changing it from within. FEE has aimed its magazine, pamphlets and conferences at high school and early college students.

14. Daddy Warbucks - seek out a very wealthy man to fund institutes and centres, such as Cato, the William Volker Fund, and Liberty Fund.

15. Brownian Martyrdom - Algernon Sidney’s republicanism and John Brown’s abolitionism. Confront the unjust and coercive state and throw yourself under the tracks of its tanks. Maybe someone will learn from your heroic act.

16. Single Causism - such as Abolitionism - Wilberforce and Clarkson, and the English abolition of the slave trade; and Cobden/Bright and the Anti-Corn Law League. Cobden’s idea was to create a broad coalition of groups who could all agree on one thing (free trade) and then dissolve the organisation once that had been achieved.

Of course, the world being a complex and messy place, there is probably no one strategy which will be successful in all places and all times. As Mao said in a different context - “let a thousand flowers bloom” - and it looks as though it has if one looks at the history of the classical liberal movement.

Bibliography↩

Monographs and Articles

John Blundell, Margaret Thatcher: A Portrait of the Iron Lady (New York: Algora Publishing, 2008).

John Blundell, Waging the War of Ideas (London: Institute of Economic Affairs, 2007).

[Blundell], Remembering Margaret Thatcher: Commemorations, Tributes and Assessments. Edited and Annotated by John Blundell. Introduction by the Rt. Hon. David David M.P. (New York: Algora Publishing, 2013).

John Blundell, “Arthur Seldon and the Institute of Economic Affairs” (November, 2013) http://oll.libertyfund.org/pages/seldon-and-the-iea.

Stephen Davies, “Richard Cobden: Ideas and Strategies in Organizing the Free-Trade Movement in Britain” (January 2015) http://oll.libertyfund.org/pages/lm-cobden.

• and the associated illustrated essay “Cobden and the Anti-Corn Law League” http://oll.libertyfund.org/pages/cobden-and-the-anti-corn-law-league.

Stephen Davies, “Comment” on the Libertarian Alliance edition of Rothbard’s “Four Strategies for Libertarian Change,” Tactical Notes No. 6, (Libertarian Alliance, 1989). http://www.libertarian.co.uk/sites/default/lanotepdf/tactn006.pdf, pp. 12–14.

Brian Doherty, Radicals for Capitalism: A Freewheeling History of the Modern American Libertarian Movement (New York: Public Affairs, Perseus Books Group, 2007).

Alan Ebenstein, Friedrich Hayek: A Biography (New York: Palgrave, 2001).

Gerald Frost, Antony Fisher: Champion of Liberty (London: Profile Books, 2002).

[Hamowy], The Encyclopedia of Libertarianism, ed. Ronald Hamowy (Los Angeles: Sage, 2008. A Project of the Cato Institute). Editor-in-Chief, Ronald Hamowy; Assistant Editors, Jason Kuznicki and Aaron Steelman; Consulting Editor, Deirdre McCloskey. Founding and Consulting Editor, Jeffrey D. Schultz. (See below for details).

David M. Hart, “Study Guides on the Classical Liberal Tradition” (2011) http://davidmhart.com/liberty/ClassicalLiberalism/index.html. It consists of:

• A concept map showing the key ideas of the classical liberal tradition
• A History of Classical Liberalism in Three Parts
  • Part 1: Twelve Keys Concepts of the Classical Liberal Tradition
  • Part 2: Ideological Movements and Key Political Events
  • Part 3: Quotations from Key Texts Illustrating Classical Liberal Ideas

David M. Hart, “The Liberal Roots of American Conservatism: Bastiat and the French Connection,” a paper given to the Philadelphia Society meeting March 27–29, 2015.

R.M. Hartwell, A History of the Mont Pelerin Society (Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, 1995).

Friedrich A. Hayek, The Road to Serfdom (The University of Chicago Press, 1944, 1976).

Friedrich A. Hayek, The Road to Serfdom, with The Intellectuals and Socialism. The Condensed Version of The Road to Serfdom as it appeared in the April 1945 edition of Reader’s Digest (London: The Institute of Economic Affairs, 2005). With “The Road to Serfdom in Cartoons”. Originally published in Look magazine.

F.A. Hayek, “The Intellectuals and Socialism” (1949) in Studies in Philosophy, Politics, and Economics (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1967), pp. 178–94.

• online at mises.org http://mises.org/etexts/hayekintellectuals.pdf.

F.A. Hayek, The Collected Works of F.A. Hayek. Volume 12, The Pure Theory of Capital (1941), edited by Lawrence H. White (Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, 2007).

Aileen S. Kraditor, Means and Ends in American Abolitionism: Garrison and his Critics on Strategy and Tactics, 1834–1850 New York: Pantheon Books, 1969).

Joseph Hamburger, Intellectuals in Politics: John Stuart Mill and the Philosophic Radicals (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1965).

Vladimir Lenin, What Is to Be Done? Burning Questions of Our Movement (1901, 1902). Lenin’s Collected Works, Foreign Languages Publishing House, 1961, Moscow, Volume 5, pp. 347–530. https://marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1901/witbd/index.htm or PDF https://marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/download/what-itd.pdf.

Ludwig von Mises, Human Action: A Treatise on Economics, in 4 vols., ed. Bettina Bien Greaves (Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, 2007). http://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/1892.

Mueller, Rothbard, Crane, Liggio, Koch, Evers, Theroux, in Libertarian Review, Special Issue on “Toward the Second American Revolution: Libertarian Strategies for Today”, Aug. 1978, vol. 7, no.7, http://www.libertarianism.org/lr/LR788.pdf.

• Milton Mueller, “Toward a Libertarian Theory of Revolution,” pp. 14–17.
• Murray Rothbard, “Strategies for a Libertarian Victory,” pp. 18–24, 34.
• Ed Crane, “Taking Politics Seriously,” pp. 26–27, 42
• Leonard Liggio, “The Disenchanted Electorate: Capturing the Independent Voter,” pp. 28–29, 42.
• Charles Koch, “The Business Community: Resisting Regulation,” pp. 30–34.
• Bill Evers, “Party Newsletters: No More Kvetching,” pp. 36–37, 42.
• David Theroux, “Lessons for Libertarian Campus Radicalism,” pp. 38–41.

Jim Powell, The Triumph of Liberty: A 2,000-Year History, told through the Lives’ of Freedom’s Greatest Champions New York: The Free Press, 2000).

Murray N. Rothbard, Toward a Strategy for Libertarian Social Change (April, 1977). <davidmhart.com/liberty/AmericanLibertarians/Rothbard/Rothbard_1977TowardStrategy.pdf> [PDF 6.9 MB]

Murray Rothbard, “Strategies for a Libertarian Victory,” Libertarian Review, Special Issue on “Strategies for Achieving Liberty” Aug. 1978, vol. 7, no.7, pp. 18–24, 34. http://www.libertarianism.org/lr/LR788.pdf

• Murray N. Rothbard, “Strategies For A Libertarian Victory” (Libertarian Party. Rothbard Caucus) (February 2004) http://www.lprc.org/strategies.html. This is an online version of Rothbard’s essay which first appeared in Libertarian Review (August, 1978). With an epilog dated July, 1982

Murray N. Rothbard, Part V: “Toward A Theory of Strategy for Liberty.” in The Ethics of Liberty With a New Introduction by Hans-Hermann Hoppe (New York: New York University Press, 1998). 1st published (Atlantic Highlands, N.J.: Humanities Press, 1982), pp. 257–273. <davidmhart.com/liberty/AmericanLibertarians/Rothbard/Rothbard_1998TheoryStrategy.pdf> [PDF 438 KB]

Murray N. Rothbard, “Concepts of the Role of Intellectuals in Social Change Toward Laissez-Faire,” The Journal of libertarian Studies, vol. IX, no. 2 (Fall 1990), pp. 43–67.

• My website facsimile PDF of JLS article: <davidmhart.com/liberty/AmericanLibertarians/Rothbard/Rothbard_1990IntellectualsSocialChange.pdf> [PDF 1.3 MB]
• another version is online in at the Libertarian Alliance (London) website, with a comment by Steve Davies, under the slightly different title of “Four Strategies for Libertarian Change,” Tactical Notes No. 6, (Libertarian Alliance, 1989). http://www.libertarian.co.uk/sites/default/lanotepdf/tactn006.pdf. See section on “Libertarian Strategy” http://www.libertarian.co.uk/?q=taxonomy/term/37.

Jean Baptiste Say, A Treatise on Political Economy; or the production, distribution, and consumption of wealth. Translated from the 4th ed. of the French by C.R. Prinsep. To which is added, a translation of the introduction and additional notes, by Clement C. Biddle (Boston, Wells and Lilly, 1821).

Arthur Seldon, The Collected Works of Arthur Seldon, 7 vols., ed. and with Introductions by Colin Robinson (Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, 2004–5). Vol. 7. PDF only http://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/1456.

Dane Starbuck, The Goodriches: An American Family (Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, 2001). http://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/1065.

Key Movements, Individuals, and Events in the Evolution of the Classical Liberal Tradition

The Encyclopedia of Libertarianism provides an excellent survey of the key movements, individuals, and events in the evolution of the classical liberal movement.

[Hamowy], The Encyclopedia of Libertarianism, ed. Ronald Hamowy (Los Angeles: Sage, 2008. A Project of the Cato Institute). Editor-in-Chief, Ronald Hamowy; Assistant Editors, Jason Kuznicki and Aaron Steelman; Consulting Editor, Deirdre McCloskey. Founding and Consulting Editor, Jeffrey D. Schultz. (See below for details).

One should begin with Steve Davies’ “General Introduction,” pp. xxv-xxxvii, which is an excellent survey of the ideas, movements, and key events in the development of liberty, then read some of the articles on specific historical periods, movements, schools of thought, and individuals. Items in quotes are entries in the Encyclopedia.

1. The Ancient World
   1. “Liberty in the Ancient World”
   2. “Epicurianism”
   3. “Stoicism”
2. Medieval Period
   1. “Scholastics - School of Salamanca”
3. Reformation & Renaissance
   1. “Classical Republicanism”
   2. “Dutch Republic”
4. The 17th Century
   1. “English Civil Wars”
      1. “The Levellers”
      2. “John Milton” & “Puritanism”
   2. “Glorious Revolution”
      1. “John Locke” & “Algernon Sidney”
      2. “Whiggism”
5. The 18th Century
   1. 18thC Commonwealthmen - “Cato’s Letters”
   2. The Scottish Enlightenment
      1. “Enlightenment”
      2. “Adam Smith”, “Adam Ferguson” & “David Hume”
   3. The French Enlightenment
      1. “Physiocracy” - “Turgot”
      2. “Montesquieu” & “Voltaire”
   4. “American Revolution”
      1. “Declaration of Independence” - “Thomas Jefferson” & “Thomas Paine”
      2. “Constitution, U.S.” - “James Madison”
      3. “Bill of Rights, U.S.”
   5. “French Revolution”
      1. “Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen”
6. The 19th Century
   1. “Classical Liberalism” - the English School
      1. “Philosophic Radicals”
      2. “Utilitarianism” - “Jeremy Bentham”
      3. “Classical Economics” - “John Stuart Mill”
   2. “Classical Liberalism” - the French School
      1. “Jean-Baptiste Say” & “Benjamin Constant”
      2. “Charles Comte” & “Charles Dunoyer”
      3. “Frédéric Bastiat” & “Gustave de Molinari”
   3. Free Trade Movement
      1. “Anti-Corn Law League” - “John Bright” & “Richard Cobden”
   4. “Feminism and Women’s Rights”
      1. “Mary Wollstonecraft”
      2. “Condorcet”
   5. Abolition of Slavery - “Abolitionism”
      1. “William Wilberforce”
      2. “William Lloyd Garrison” & “John Brown”
      3. “Frederick Douglass” & “Lysander Spooner”
   6. [The Radical Individualists]
      1. “Thomas Hodgskin”, “Herbert Spencer”, & “Auberon Herbert”
   7. The “Austrian School of Economics” I
      1. 1st generation - “Carl Menger”, “Eugen von Böhm-Bawerk”
      2. interwar years - “Ludwig von Mises”, “Friedrich Hayek”
7. Post-World War 2 Renaissance
   1. “Mont Pelerin Society” - “Friedrich Hayek”, “Milton Friedman”, “Karl Popper”, “James Buchanan”
   2. Institute for Economic Affairs (IEA) & “Antony Fisher”
   3. Foundation for Economc Education (FEE) & “Leonard Read”
   4. Institute for Humane Studies & “F.A. Harper”
   5. The Austrian School of Economics II
      1. post-WW2 2nd generation - “Ludwig von Mises”, “Friedrich Hayek”, “Murray N. Rothbard”, “Israel Kirzner”
   6. “Chicago School of Economics” & “Milton Friedman”
   7. “Objectivism” & “Ayn Rand”
   8. “Public Choice Economics” & “James Buchanan”

Endnotes↩