Category Archives: CL Tradition

My “Farewell to America” tour (January 2020)

Posted on by

As part of my “Farewell to America” tour in January 2020 I gave the following talks and papers on my way back to Australia:

  1. On Bastiat at the Political Economy Project at Dartmouth College, New Hampshire
  2. On Bastiat at the American Institute for Economic Research, Great Barrington, Massachusetts
  3. On classical liberal class analysis at the Adam Smith Center and the School of Social Sciences, Singapore Management University
  4. On the history of the classical liberal tradition at the Mannkal Economic Education Foundation, Perth, Western Australia

David’s lecture on Bastiat
[David’s lecture on Bastiat at the AIER]

(1.) Dartmouth College: “Bastiat’s Economic Harmonies: A Reassessment after 170 Years.”

At Dartmouth College, New Hampshire: “Bastiat’s Economic Harmonies: A Reassessment after 170 Years.” A paper given to the Political Economy Project at Dartmouth College, Hanover, New Hampshire (7 Jan. 2020). This paper is a summary of what I have learned about the originality and importance of Bastiat as an economic theorist after having completed the manuscript of volume 5 of the Collected Works of Bastiat for Liberty Fund in September 2020. It builds upon a “Liberty Matters” discussion I organised on this topic earlier in the year when I invited leading scholars of Bastiat’s economic thought (Donald J. Boudreaux, Guido Hülsmann, and Joseph T. Salerno) to give their assessment of his work. See the discussion. In my paper I talked about Bastiat’s importance as a leading classical liberal figure and the striking radicalism of his thought. I also explain why I think he is underrated as an economic, political, and social theorist but justly recognised as one of the greatest economic journalists and popularizers of economic ideas who has ever lived. I include in the paper a number of key passages from his writings to illustrate my claims. See the paper in HTML and PDF; and also the lecture slides PDF. The talk was videoed but has not been released to my knowledge.

(2.) American Institute for Economic Research, Great Barrington, Massachusetts: “Bastiat on Harmony and Disharmony”

At the American Institute for Economic Research, Great Barrington, Massachusetts. Here I gave a paper on my reconstruction of what Bastiat’s great unfinished works on Harmony and Disharmony might have looked like had he lived long enough to complete them. These never finished works might rank alongside Lord Acton’s much anticipated History of Liberty as one of the most important classical liberal books never written. I also was interviewed by Jeff Tucker on the importance, originality, and radicalism of Bastiat which appears as a three part podcast.

“Bastiat on Harmony and Disharmony” – a talk given at the AIER (20 January, 2020). In this nearly book-length paper I explore the connection between harmony and disharmony in the thought of Bastiat. The interconnections between the two show that Bastiat was never a crude “optimist” as many of his critics have argued. Given the presence of “plunder” and “disharmony” in human relations throughout history Bastiat understood that harmony could and had been disrupted or prevent from occurring – hence his desire to write a book on The History of Plunder to explain how this had taken place and what it had meant for human flourishing. In spite of these impediments, the potentially “harmonious” nature of human relationships kept bursting through in the form of markets and other social interactions between individuals. He thought this needed to be described and explained in at least two works – one on “social harmony” broadly understood (legal, social, political), and another on the very important subset of harmony, namely “economic harmonies”. In Bastiat’s theory of history there was a constant tension between the forces or factors tending towards “disharmony” (disturbing factors) and those tending towards “harmony” (restorative factors) which I explore in some detail. The end result I believe is a very sophisticated and rich social theory which has not been properly appreciated by historians of thought in general and libertarians in particular. See the lecture in HTML and PDF 5.9MB; as well as the lecture slides PDF. The video of the proceedings is here and on Youtube.

Following the talk, I was interviewed by Jeff Tucker on the life and thought of Frédéric Bastiat which appears in three parts.

  1. Part 1: “Who was Claude-Frédéric Bastiat?” Part1
  2. Part 2: “Who was Claude-Frédéric Bastiat” Part 2
  3. Part 3: “Insights into Bastiat’s Libertarianism” Part 3

(3.) Singapore: “Understanding Class Divisions in Society: A Classical Liberal Approach”

In Singapore I gave a talk on how classical liberal class analysis can explain many of the divisions which have arisen in modern societies; and was interviewed on the history of the classical liberal tradition and what this political tradition still has to offer us today.

“Understanding Class Divisions in Society: A Classical Liberal Approach”. This talk is part of the Philosophy, Politics and Economics (PPE) Series co-organised by the Adam Smith Center and the School of Social Sciences, Singapore Management University (20 Jan. 2020). According to socialists and Marxists, tensions and conflicts within society are the result of the very essence of the existence of private property and free market relationships between individuals (especially wage labour). In a “capitalist” society these tensions become so great that they give rise to “classes” which contend for power and profits and eventually result (according to the Marxists) in class warfare and ultimately revolution. The classical liberal tradition on the other hand also has a theory of class and class conflict, but these tensions and conflicts are the result of political and other coercive interventions in the economy. In this talk I explore the kinds of problems and tensions created by government intervention the economy, how they give rise to “class conflict” (class here being defined politically rather than economically), and how this different way of looking at the world can help us understand and explain the cause of many tensions and conflicts which are afflicting societies today. The five examples of social tensions and conflicts caused by governments which I discuss in the talk include:

  1. different groups fighting over control of limited resources (taxes) in order to get benefits for themselves
  2. different groups trying to get laws passed by the government to further their own vision of “the good society” and to exclude or harm groups they oppose
  3. different regions of nation states trying to free themselves from central control and taxation, and seeking autonomy
  4. groups which oppose the “capitalist system” (the free market and liberal society) and which seek to either overthrow it or radically change it so it conforms to their ideas of how a future society should be structured and run
  5. the most powerful groups in society who wish to use the power of the state to pursue their own interests at an international level

See the lecture in [ HTML ] and [ PDF ]. A video of the talk is on Facebook.

I was also interviewed by Bryan Cheang, head of the Adam Smith Centre , on the history of the classical liberal tradition (not yet online).

(4.) The Mannkal Economic Education Foundation, Perth, Western Australia: “An Introduction to the Classical Liberal Tradition: People, Ideas, and Movements”.

“An Introduction to the Classical Liberal Tradition: People, Ideas, and Movements”. A talk given at the Mannkal Economic Education Foundation, Perth (30 January, 2020). In this talk I survey for Mannkal’s incoming students (for northern hemisphere readers the academic year in Australia starts at the end of summer, i.e February/March) the long history of the classical liberal tradition and its key ideas. I discuss the long history of the Classical Liberal tradition (CLT) which goes back over 400 years; how it has evolved over this period in reaction to the different kinds of oppression people have suffered under; and the problem we in the present face with defining what is meant by “liberalism” (hence the need for what I call “hyphenated” liberalism.” I argue that there have been 4 main periods in the evolution of CL ideas, beginning in the 1640s and continuing into 1680s (the English Civil War and Revolution in the 1640s (1647-49); and the “Glorious Revolution” of 1688-89); the 1750s-1790s (the “trans-Atlantic” Enlightenment and the American and French Revolutions; the liberal reforms of the19th century 1815-1914 (the period of so-called “Classical Liberalism”; and the post-WW2 liberal / libertarian renaissance. I argue that there are two sets of ideas wee have to take into account: the things CLs were Against and the things they were For. It is in relation to the latter that I present my list of the “Twelve Key Concepts of CL”. Although the achievements of the CLT have been immense, it seems that that CL might be losing the battle of ideas today.

I have given versions of this talk for over a decade and I am currently re-writing and expanding it (as well as adding a section on liberalism in Australia). See the documents listed here “Study Guides on the Classical Liberal Tradition”, especially the section on “The 12 Key Concepts of Liberty”. An important summary of CL ideas and movements can be found in the Cato Institute’s The Encyclopedia of Libertarianism (2008) which is now online, along with my selection (with links) of the key entries and also here.
See also the PDF of my Mannkal talk overheads and Further Reading.

In addition to the talk, I ran a workshop for the Mannkal students in which we conducted a close reading of my new translation and edition of Bastiat’s perhaps best-known essay “The Law” (1850). See “Frédéric Bastiat, The Law (June 1850): A New Translation by David M. Hart with a Reader’s Guide to the Text” (with discussion questions and key passages) PDF.

Celebrating the Bicentennial of the birth of Gustave de Molinari (1819-1912)

Posted on by

3 March 2019 will be the two hundredth anniversary of the birth of Gustave de Molinari, the “founding father” of anarcho-capitalism. To celebrate this event I have put together an anthology of his key writings on the state which will be published by Institut Coppet (Paris) next year. A draft of the book is online and contains a detailed biographical essay on his life and work (in English), 24 extracts from his writings between 1846-1911 (en français) with brief introductions to each one (in English) , and an updated bibibliography of all his works (still a work in progress).

For more information about Molinari see the updated main Molinari page.

The table of contents of the the anthology:

I. Molinari’s Political Credo: “la Liberté, la Propriété, et la Paix” (Liberty, Property, Peace)

  1. His “Spartacus speech” (1849). [Les Soirées, 1849, S12 pp. 348–63.]
  2. Molinari’s Credo: “la Liberté et la Paix” (1861). [“Introduction”, Questions d’économie politique et de droit public (1861), vol. 1, pp. v-xxxi. ]
  3. “Programme économique” (1891). [Notions fondamentales d’Économie politique (1891), pp. 381–96.]

II. The First Formulation of the Theory of Anarcho-Capitalism (1846–1849)

  1. “Le droit électoral” (1846). [Courrier français, 23 July 1846; reprinted in Questions d’économie politique (1861), T. 2, pp. 271–275.]
  2. ”La Production de la sécurité” (1849). [JDE, T. XXII, no. 95, 15 fév., 1849, pp. 277–90.]
  3. “On Government and its Function” (1849). [Les Soirées, S11, pp. 303–337.]

III. Molinari’s Theory of the State I

  1. “Le Despotisme et les mangeurs des taxes” (1852). [Les Révolutions et le despotisme envisagés au point de vue des intérêts matériel (1852), pp. 81–152.]
  2. “Nations” (1853). [Dictionnaire de l’économie politique, T. 2, pp. 259–62.]

IV. The Further Development of Molinari’s Theory of Pure Anarcho-capitalism (1852–1863)

  1. “Les consommations publiques” (1855, 1863). [Cours d’économie politique (1855, 1863), T. 2, pp. 480–534.]
  2. ”De l’administration de la Justice” (1855). [L’économiste belge No. 11, 5 Juin 1855, pp. 1–3.]

V. Molinari’s Theory of the State II: The “Tempered” (strengthened, hardened) Republic (1873)

  1. “La République tempérée” (1873). [La République tempérée (1873), I, pp. 5–14; II pp. 15–25; V, pp. 59–77; VI. pp. 79–90.]

VI. Molinari’s Gradual Retreat from Strict Anarcho-Capitalism (1880–1908)

  1. ”La théorie du progrès et l’évolution économique” (1880). [L’Évolution économique du dix-neuvième siècle (1880), “Conclusion,” pp. 439–69.]
  2. ”Les gouvernements de l’avenir” (1884). [L’Évolution politique et la Révolution (1884), Chap. X “Les gouvernements de l’avenir,” pp. 351–423.]
  3. ”La liberté de gouvernement” (1887). [Les Lois naturelles de l’économie politique (1887), pp. 238–77.]
  4. ”Projet d’Association pour l’établissement d’une Ligue des neutres” (1887). [The Times, 28 juillet 1887. Republished in La morale économique (1888), pp. 431–38).]
  5. “La décadence de la guerre” (1898). [La Grandeur et decadence de la guerre (1898), selections from pp. 113–72.]
  6. ”La constitution libre” (1899). [Esquisse de l’organisation politique et économique de la société future (1899), pp.69–93.]
  7. “Le problème du gouvernement individuel” (1900). [JDE, S. 5, T. 44, N° 3, décembre 1900, pp. 321–39.]

VII. Last Words on the Matter (1901–1911)

  1. Summing up the liberal successes and failures of the 19th Century (January, 1901). [“Le XIXe siècle”, JDE, Jan.1901), pp. 5–19.]
  2. Predicting the Catastrophes of the 20th Century (January, 1902). [“Le XXe siècle,” JDE, Jan. 1902), pp. 5–14.]
  3. “Où est l’Utopie?” (1906). [JDE, S. 6, T. 3, N° 2, août 1904.]
  4. “Le vol et l’échange” (1908). [JDE, S. 6, T. 19, N° 1, juillet 1908.]
  5. “La crise et la décadence” (1908). [Économie de l’histoire. Théorie de l’évolution (1908), pp. 219–257.]
  6. Molinari’s “Last Words” (1911). [Ultima Verba: Mon dernier ouvrage (1911), “Préface,” pp. i-xvii.]

Entrepreneurs, Investors, and Scribblers: An Austrian Analysis of the Structure of Production and Distribution of Ideas

Posted on by

A Paper given at the Southern Economics Association 2015 Annual Meeting
New Orleans, November 21-23, 2015

ProductionIdeasSchematic-Ideas600

An online version of this paper is available here: HTML and PDF.

Abstract: Austrian capital theory is applied to the study of how ideas (in this case classical liberal or libertarian ideas) have been produced, distributed, and consumed. It is based upon an examination of three key historical examples – the Anti-Corn Law League in the early 1840s, the Political Economists in Paris during the 1840s, and the activities of the Institute of Economic Affairs in London in post-war Britain. It is argued that there is a long structure of production in the realm of ideas as there is for capital goods, with highest order goods (the production of high theory) most removed from ultimate consumption (politicians, ordinary people, voters), and with several middle order stages which serve as intermediary steps along the way (production of ideas for college professors, intellectuals, members of think tanks, journalists, and lobbyists). In each of these historical examples there are investors with capital who invest in creating organisations to promote certain ideas, “entrepreneurs of ideas” who see opportunities for bringing together the right combination and mix of individuals with different talents to bring this about, marketers and other promoters who are able to sell these ideas to a broader public, and finally the ultimate consumers of these ideas who accept them and act on them in some way.

Here are the opening paragraphs:

I would like to begin by shamelessly stealing some ideas from Ed Lopez. He reminds us of the striking, parallel thinking of two widely divergent economic theorists, namely John Maynard Keynes and Friedrich Hayek. To begin with the latter:

In the light of recent history it is somewhat curious that this decisive power of the professional secondhand dealers in ideas should not yet be more generally recognized. The political development of the Western World during the last hundred years furnishes the clearest demonstration. Socialism has never and nowhere been at first a working-class movement. It is by no means an obvious remedy for the obvious evil which the interests of that class will necessarily demand. It is a construction of theorists, deriving from certain tendencies of abstract thought with which for a long time only the intellectuals were familiar; and it required long efforts by the intellectuals before the working classes could be persuaded to adopt it as their program. (The opening of Hayek’s “The Intellectuals and Socialism” (1949). Emphasis added.)

The flow of ideas in Hayek’s view goes from the “theorists” who spend their time “constructing” “abstract thought”; to the “intellectuals whom he describes as “secondhand dealers in ideas”; to their final destination in the minds of “the working classes” who adopt them as part of their program. Hayek describes the time frame for the transmission of ideas quite vaguely, as “a long time” and only after “long efforts”.

Thirteen years earlier Keynes expressed something very similar, but using different though still somewhat contemptuous terminology,

… the ideas of economists and philosophers, both when they are right and when they are wrong, are more powerful than is commonly understood. Indeed, the world is ruled by little else. Practical men, who believe themselves to be quite exempt from any intellectual influences, are usually the slaves of some defunct economist. Madmen in authority, who hear voices in the air, are distilling their frenzy from some academic scribbler of a few years back. I am sure that the power of vested interests is vastly exaggerated compared with the gradual encroachment of ideas. Not, indeed, immediately, but after a certain interval … [S]oon or late, it is ideas, not vested interests, which are dangerous for good or evil. (From John Maynard Keynes, The General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money (1936) quoted in Leighton and Lopez, p. 109.)

The flow of ideas in Keynes’s view goes from “defunct economists”, to “academic scribblers”, to “madmen in authority” (presumably politicians), and finally to “practical men” and “vested interests.” Keynes likewise is quite vague about the time required for ideas to go from “scribbler” to “vested interests”, saying merely “after a certain interval”, or “sooner or later”.

What I would like to do is to offer some specific historical examples of such transmission of ideas and to use the Hayekian theory of capital structure to help explain the process by which this transmission occurs, and the types of people involved in it. This involves the identification of at least 4 stages or “orders” in the production of ideas from “high theory” to the “consumption” of (or, rather, the acting upon) those ideas by ordinary individuals; as well as the role played by key individuals such as “investors”, “entrepreneurs,” and “sales people,” and the different kinds of “idea factories” in which they work.

Slavery and the Hypocrisy of July 4

Posted on by

Douglass300

A useful corrective to the unthinking patriotism usually on display on July 4th is to read Frederick Douglass’s great “July 5th Oration” which he gave in 1852. He asks his listeners the following important question and then gives a devastating answer to it:

“What, to the American slave, is your 4th of July? I answer; a day that reveals to him, more than all other days in the year, the gross injustice and cruelty to which lie is the constant victim. To him, your celebration is a sham; your boasted liberty, an unholy license; your national greatness, swelling vanity; your sounds of rejoicing are empty and heartless; your denunciations of tyrants, brass fronted impudence; your shouts of liberty and equality, hollow mockery; your prayers and hymns, your sermons and thanksgivings, with all your religious parade, and solemnity, are, to him, mere bombast, fraud, deception, impiety, and hypocrisy-a thin veil to cover up crimes which would disgrace a nation of savages. There is not a nation on the earth guilty of practices, more shocking and bloody, than are the people of these United States, at this very hour.” (p. 20)

Douglass does admit that in its rhetoric, in the philosophical ideas it articulates, “as it ought to be interpreted, the Constitution is a GLORIOUS LIBERTY DOCUMENT. Read its preamble, consider its purposes. Is slavery among them? Is it at the gateway? or is it in the temple? it is neither.” (p. 36)

Given the sad history of how the ideas of the Declaration of Independence were actually, and are now currently, being put into practice, one can only agree with his conclusion that “America is false to the past, false to the present, and solemnly binds herself to be false to the future.”

Source: Oration, Delivered in Corinthian Hall, Rochester, by Frederick Douglass, July 5th, 1852 (Rochester: Printed by Lee, Mann, and Co., American Building, 1852).

Very few know, or want to know, that twelve American presidents owned slaves at some point in their lives and that eight of them owned slaves while serving as President (see list below). Thus, for 50 years during the pre-Civil War period a slave-owner was in the White House. It is also the case that although the slave trade had been abolished in Washington D.C. in 1850, slave owning was still permitted for another 15 years. This meant that the “great emancipator” Abraham Lincoln lived in the White House when it was still using slave labour as household help.

Presidents who owned slaves (in caps if they owned slaves while in office):

  1. GEORGE WASHINGTON (Pres. 1789-1797) (owned between 250-350 slaves)
  2. THOMAS JEFFERSON (1801-1809) (about 200)
  3. JAMES MADISON (1809-1817) (more than 100)
  4. JAMES MONROE (1817-1825) (about 75)
  5. ANDREW JACKSON (1829-1837) (fewer than 200)
  6. Martin Van Buren (1837-1841) (one)
  7. William Henry Harrison (1841-41) (eleven)
  8. JOHN TYLER (1845-1849) (about 70)
  9. JAMES POLK (1845-1849) (about 25)
  10. ZACHARY TAYLOR (1849-1850) (fewer than 150)
  11. Andrew Johnson (1865-1869) (probably eight)
  12. Ulysses S. Grant (1869-1877) (probably five)

Here is an interesting image of Washington the slave owner from 1851 – “Washington as Farmer at Mount Vernon”, 1851, part of a series on George Washington by Junius Brutus Stearns. Located at the Virginia Museum of Fine Arts.

Washington_Vernon1851_600

And an advertisement placed in The Pennsylvania Gazette, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, May 24, 1796, which offers a reward of $10 for the capture of one of his run-away slaves.

Oney_Judge_Runaway_Ad600

Source: Mary V. Thompson, “William Lee & Oney Judge: A Look at George Washington & Slavery ,” Journal of the American Revolution, June 19, 2014.

Another useful corrective for patriots is Jeffrey Rogers Hummel’s article “The Constitution as Counter-Revolution: A Tribute to the Anti-Federalists,” Free Life. The Journal of the Libertarian Alliance, Vol. 5 : No.4. (no date) PDF

The Golden Age of French Liberalism in the 19th Century: An Anthology in French

Posted on by

9782729881962.indd

L’âge d`or du libéralisme français. Anthologie. XIXe siècle. Robert Leroux et David M. Hart. Préface de Mathieu Laine (Paris: Editions Ellipses, 2014).

This anthology in French is slightly larger than the English language one we did for Routledge. It contains 41 extracts. However, the master collection contains 79 extracts in French which can be found here.

ToC:

Continue reading →