Home

Liberty Fund, Inc. is a private, educational foundation established to encourage the study of the ideal of a society of free and responsible individuals.

Copyright information:

The copyright to this publication is held by Liberty Fund, Inc. The New Individualist Review is prohibited for use in any publication, journal, or periodical without written consent of J. M. Cobb, J. M. S. Powell, or David Levy.

Fair use statement:

This material is put online to further the educational goals of Liberty Fund, Inc. Unless otherwise stated in the Copyright Information section above, this material may be used freely for educational and academic purposes. It may not be used in any way for profit.

NEW BOOKS AND ARTICLES

THE FOLLOWING ARE A SELECTION OF ITEMS AND NOTES WHICH, IN THE OPINION OF THE EDITORS, MAY BE OF INTEREST TO OUR READERS.

John Kenneth Galbraith, whose recent book The New Industrial State (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1967) should escape public notice, has just written an important tract on the Viet Nam war; important because of Galbraith’s prominent position among the anti-war faction of the Establishment. How To Get Out of Vietnam (New York: Signet Books, 1967. 47p. 35 cents.) sets down in cogent form the most important assumptions usually made by opponents of the Viet Nam involvement, and after thoroughly illustrating if not documenting those assumptions, draws the necessary conclusions: “. . . it is now a war that we cannot win, should not wish to win, are not winning, and which our people do not support. . . .” (p. 32) Galbraith’s thoughts raise an important issue in the minds of certain observers of the pro- and anti-Viet Nam debates, the fact that both positions make unproven, and at worst undemonstrated, assumptions about the nature of “the enemy.” Galbraith rather carefully demolishes, for example, the usual anti-Communist approach to foreign involvement (he concludes: “The enemy coalition—the empire—against which our operation was launched turned out not to exist. This cannot have happened very often in history. . . .” [p. 15]); but to do so he relies in turn upon his own assumptions as to the nature of the Communist governments, assumptions which those who disagree with him cannot accept because he dismisses any “world-wide coordination” aspect of Communism and styles it all as Titoist nationalism. It would seem that any useful discussion of American foreign policy must grapple with the empirical documentation of assumptions such as these; but such documentation would seem to be either unobtainable in a scientifically acceptable form, or, if available, much too dispersed and unorganized to be usefully marshaled. A third possibility is also plausible, given the political Left-Right polarization of foreign policy discussions: the factual evidence which may be in the possession of known anti-Communists is suspect by men such as Galbraith because a mutual trust in the others’ integrity is lacking—those in possession of facts damaging to the position of their opponents are considered capable of fraud to defend their own position. Likewise, those who fear the less than pleasant prospect of a global American Empire policing the free world at enormous cost in lives, money, and domestic liberty are seen as dangerously blind and naive, and dismissed with vague references to Munich and America First. It becomes, on the one hand an act of faith that “international Communism” is a terrible menace to free men everywhere, and on the other that “Cold War paranoia” is regimenting free men at home and extinguishing rational foreign policy abroad.
The editors of New Individualist Review have been divided for some time as to what editorial position to adopt on this question, and have sidestepped the issue in favor of omitting articles devoted to foreign policy. In the future, we would like to consider for publication well written and thoroughly documented articles on these general questions. We invite our readers to assist us in this endeavor.
Dan Cordtz, “Social Security: Drifting Off Course,” Fortune, December 1967, pp. 104-7ff. The Social Security System, which for three decades has been the holiest of sacred cows in the American political barn, has come under increasing investigation in the past three years, possibly as a result of the surprising reaction Sen. Goldwater’s campaign encountered in 1964—surprising to the campaigners, although not to their opponents. It is a tribute to the extent that conventional wisdom can be subverted by scholarly investigation and exposure that the number of articles critical of Social Security has expanded, and that a few books have appeared reopening the question. Diligent effort by Right-wing scholars has forced even non-political studies to examine Social Security with critical questions in mind. It can be hoped that election campaigns in 1968 or 1972 may see the Social Security System dismantled entirely.
Prof. Harry Kalven, Jr., of the University of Chicago Law School, examines the applicability of the Constitutional guarantees of freedom of the press to the radio and TV broadcasting industries in the October 1967 issue of The Journal of Law and Economics (“Broadcasting, Public Policy and the First Amendment”). He argues that the United States wrongly has two traditions in freedom of expression, one relating to the press and the other to broadcasting. He then goes on to show that precedents exist in other fields for application of the First Amendment (for example, motion pictures and second class mailing rights) which could easily be extended to radio and TV in the event of a legal showdown before the Supreme Court. The entire Volume X (207 pp.) is available for $2.50 ($1.00 for students) from the Journal; see their ad in this issue. Additional articles of interest in that volume include Milton Friedman on “The Monetary Theory and Policy of Henry Simons,” and articles by James Buchanan, Paul Samuelson, and Jora Minasian on the question of public goods, which was initiated in the Journal of Law and Economics, Volume VII (1964). Libertarian theorists ought to pay greater attention to the theory of public goods, inasmuch as these discussions of the marginal cases for private property bring into greater clarity and even question some of the fundamental arguments for laissez faire.
An old controversy on the Right has reappeared, which our readers may be interested in following more closely as it develops. In the January 1968 issue of The New Guard, official magazine of Young Americans for Freedom, is reprinted Frank S. Meyer’s famous article “The Twisted Tree of Liberty,” which was originally composed in reflection on the debate between New Individualist Review editor Ronald Hamowy and William F. Buckley, Jr. in the November 1961 issue of N.I.R. It is pure speculation to comment upon what might have encouraged The New Guard to pick up the article for reprinting from National Review (Jan. 16, 1962), but the recent review of Meyer’s Moulding of Communists in Murray N. Rothbard’s journal of libertarian thought, Left and Right, might have had something to do with it. Taking Meyer (and by implication, Burnham and the rest of the Right-wing ex-Communists) to task for singlemindedly directing American conservatism toward hard-nosed foreign policy objectives, Rothbard analyzes Meyer’s description of the typical Communist trainee (and later cadre) and points out, interestingly enough, that exactly the same moral condemnations can be made against any secretive organization man—including most especially FBI and CIA agents, who exhibit most of the traits Meyer identifies with Communism. The reader may be interested in examining Rothbard’s discussion of Meyer, inasmuch as Meyer is widely read on the Right, and Rothbard has a number of interesting things to say, but not the audience. The review appears in the Spring-Summer 1967 (Vol. 3, No. 2) issue of Left and Right, and would be available for 85 cents from them at Box 395, Cathedral Station, New York, N. Y. 10025.
An attack on Establishment “liberalism” from a radical point of view is presented in The Great Society Reader: The Failure of American Liberalism, by Marvin E. Gettleman and David Mermelstein (Vintage Books; #2.45, paper), a reader containing speeches, essays, etc., by Lyndon B. Johnson, Sargent Shriver, and Arthur Schlesinger, as well as Paul Goodman, Tom Hayden, Hans Morgenthau, and other critics of the current spirit of the times as manifested in Washington.
Most interesting to N.I.R. readers would probably be the contribution of Murray N. Rothbard, libertarian economist and editor of Left and Right. In an essay entitled “The Great Society: A Libertarian Critique,” Prof. Rothbard stresses the congruence of the Johnsonian program with the corporate state trend of American politics during most of the twentieth century. Of particular interest is his assertion that: “The cruelest myth fostered by the liberals is that the Great Society functions as a great boon and benefit to the poor; in reality, when we cut through the frothy appearances to the cold reality underneath, the poor are the major victims of the welfare state”; and Rothbard goes on to cite more than a dozen major elements of the welfare state—from minimum wages and urban renewal to inflation and the farm subsidy program—which penalize the relatively poor to the advantage of the relatively rich.
Harry G. Johnson, Economic Policies Toward Less Developed Countries. Washington, Brookings Institution, 1967. $6.95. In the discussion of economic assistance and trade between the industrialized nations and the underdeveloped world, much attention has been given to governmental structuring and planning, which involves almost necessarily restrictions on free market activity. Johnson’s survey brings out with great clarity and insight the essential features and interrelations among the leading proposals for improving international economic relations. The book is particularly noteworthy for its exposure of the economic fallacies in arguments for various forms of interference. Protectionist approaches by both rich and poor countries are contrasted unfavorably with an optimal system which would combine free trade, realistic exchange rates, and the provision of aid on the basis of net resource requirements.
A number of other Conservative publications are beginning to notice a controversy which N.I.R. joined in its November 1961 issue: Ayn Rand and her philosophy of Objectivism have been the object of a recent article by M. Stanton Evans in National Review (October 3, 1967), and the Objectivist leaders (i.e., official spokesmen of the Nathaniel Branden Institute) have come under sharp attack by a disenchanted “student of Objectivism,” Jarret B. Wollstein, in the New Guard (October 1967). Evans addresses himself to what he sees as the twin failure of Miss Rand logically to construct an ethical system which can support the kinds of behavior she favors, and her neglect of the need for a spiritual, particularly Christian, underpinning for society. The points directed by Evans to the first issue seem well taken, although he pauses to puzzle that N.I.R. saw fit to criticize Rand in spite of the seeming agreement in practical matters; the puzzle is solved by reading Prof. Goldberg’s article in the November 1961 issue more closely. His second point is weaker; consider the assertion: “The ancients could conceive of no authority higher than the polis; they believed the state had a total lien on man’s energies and affections.” Socrates’ argument in the Apology seems to invalidate such a generalization.
On a more personal level, Wollstein gives a detailed account of the troubles he encountered when he attempted to propagate the virtues of Objectivism. His report contains a truly amazing chain of events, with the Objectivist establishment performing some rather non-voluntaristic acts—including at one point the threat of force. What makes this report particularly interesting is the direct manner in which it supports Whittaker Chambers’ savage attack on the Randians in National Review (December 1957). Chambers accused Miss Rand of being a fascist. In spite of some rather ill-mannered letters from Objectivists, this charge has often seemed curious. How, after all, can one detect authoritarianism in any form in Ayn Rand’s highly voluntaristic philosophy? Indeed, Evans takes Chambers to task for the self-evident contradiction in the charge.
One line of analysis which has not been followed by any of those interested in the subject is the relation, long stressed by many inside of the classical liberal tradition, between toleration of opposing views and the fundamental rationalist recognition that it is possible to be in error. Prof. Karl Popper has warned that the great danger of irrationalist philosophy comes from its ability to dismiss any and all criticisms without considering the validity of the criticism. Hence, it is possible for some Marxists to reject logical arguments on the basis of the class interests of potential propounders. An indirect test for the tolerance of a philosophy may consist of an examination of the type of arguments which if accepted would prove the philosophy fundamentally in error. In the case of Objectivism, this examination ought to be facilitated because it goes to great lengths to stress the axiomatic and definitional bases of its arguments. In Miss Rand’s recent Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology (New York: The Objectivist, Inc., 1967. 77 pp. $1.95.) she develops her theories of axioms and definitions and defends them as being of the greatest importance: “Do you want to assess the rationality of a person, a theory or a philosophical system? Do not inquire about his or its stand on the validity of reason. Look for the stand on axiomatic concepts. It will tell the whole story.” (p. 56). “The truth or falsehood of all of man’s conclusions, inferences, thought and knowledge rests on the truth or falsehood of his definitions.” (p. 47). Axioms in her system are self-evident, their denial will lead to contradictions; an axiomatic concept “is implicit in all facts and in all knowledge. It is fundamentally given and directly perceived or experienced, which requires no proof or explanation, but on which all proofs and explanations rest.” (p. 52). Definitions represent the identification of the nature of the things defined. Although it is obvious that Miss Rand has not followed the mathematical discussions of axiomatic systems, she does profess a high regard for higher mathematics. The fundamental theorem of Gödel of course proves that for very general systems it is not possible to prove a set of axioms are both consistent and complete; but knowledge of an even older body of mathematical thought would be sufficient to demonstrate the misleading nature of her concept of axioms—it is well established that geometries denying the classical parallel axiom can be constructed as consistently as Euclidean geometry.
The well established fact that it is not always possible to resolve axiomatic questions by examining only the consistency of the deductions from those axioms destroys the possibility of discussion with Miss Rand over differences in axioms. The relevant tests differ from those which Miss Rand establishes as a check on the validity of her axioms—consistency will not suffice. Similarly, her discussion of what must happen when people disagree over definitions is singularly unhelpful; appeals to objective reality (her phrase) are useful only if one knows how to appeal. Perhaps an illustration of her procedure will show the great difficulties one would encounter if he wished to discuss fundamentals. Miss Rand defines man as a rational animal in the sense that man is capable of being rational, unlike other animals. If definitions are as important to her system as she alleges, we should certainly want to ascertain the correctness of this particular definition. Yet surely this definition is every bit as true as a definition of man as a religious and altruistic animal in that unlike other animals he is capable of being both. Now one must ask, how would Miss Rand propose to bring objective reality in to test the definitions? She does consider, and reject, divergent definitions of man, but without really indicating why. Unfortunately, the revelations of objective reality are not for the uninitiated.
Such is Miss Rand’s fundamental irrationality: Many of the interesting problems she discusses are solved with appeals to definitions pulled out of hats; axioms which can’t be tautological if used logically, but which nevertheless look like tautologies; and a very large dose of faith. Prof. Goldberg argued in his article for N.I.R. in 1961 that Objectivism is an approach which goes nowhere; perhaps it is time to consider Whittaker Chambers’ charge that Objectivism leads to somewhere far worse.

ARE Conservatives and Libertarians Natural Allies—OR Polar Opposites?

LEFT AND RIGHT favors freedom and the free market for all; for H. L. Hunt and Ralph Ginzberg; for the businessman and the enslaved draftee.

LEFT AND RIGHT favors peace and opposes the Cold War and U.S. Imperialism.

LEFT AND RIGHT is scholarly but truly radical.

Published Autumn, Winter, and Spring

LEFT AND RIGHT, Box 395, Cathedral

Station, New York, N.Y. 10025

Subscription: $2.50 per year

INTRIGUED BY THE EXCITING POTENTIALS OF TOTAL LAISSEZ FAIRE CAPITALISM?

INNOVATOR explores unconventional pathways to free enterprise.

INNOVATOR describes unusual tactics for preserving individual rights.

INNOVATOR reports on individuals who have found new ways to live in liberty TODAY!

The INNOVATOR is a newsletter of applied philosophy reporting advanced developments, experiments, and applications of liberty. Other subjects include new concepts in legal philosophy, innovations in personal relations and education, and inventions and technical processes that may alter the course of future societal developments.

“PIRATE QUEEN OR CAPITALIST HEROINE?” - “LIBERATE EDUCATION NOW!” - “TAX REVOLT!(?)” - “ECONOMIC POTENTIAL OF PREFORM’S ‘FREE ISLES’ ” - “SELL THE ROADS” - “FIRE FIGHTING FOR PROFIT IN ARIZONA” and many other articles appeared in recent issues of INNOVATOR.

For a one year subscription (12 issues) mailed anywhere in the world, send $2.00 and your name and address to:

INNOVATOR, Box 34718, Los Angeles, Calif. 90034

Single Copies (including back issues): 25c

Brand New Third Edition of HUMAN ACTION by Ludwig von Mises, Dean of Free-Market Economists. The most compelling case for economic freedom ever made . . . and one of the most enthralling books you will ever read! It is the conservative answer to Marx’s Das Kapital and Keynes’s General Theory.

AND HUMAN ACTION is fascinating. The author, Ludwig von Mises, dean of free-market economists, is a cool logician, our greatest economic scholar, a passionate lover of freedom—and an equally passionate enemy of those who would take freedom away from us.

The book has nothing but scorn for the phony “compassion” of the Marxians and Keynesians—and Mises clearly shows how their theories actually spread suffering among the poor! One by one, he sweeps away the glib fallacies of Liberalism and socialism. For instance, how many of these fallacies can you effectively rebut?

★ Free-market economics was all right for the 19th century but it is useless in today’s complex economy.

★ Capitalism was built on the broken bodies of exploited workers.

★ Businessmen have ravaged our natural resources in their lust for profit.

★ Unemployment is caused by lack of “effective demand”.

★ Unions have won rich benefits for their members.

★ Advertising is a device for defrauding the consumer and represents a net economic loss.

★ Minimum-wage laws help the poor.

Mises answers these questions and hundreds more. He offers us a mountain of fresh insights, always in a crisp style, free from clumping pedantry Among his major contributions: 1. A remarkable analysis of inflation. How it starts. The evils it brews. 2. Causes of the business cycle 3 Effects of state intervention in the economy. 4. Irrefutable demonstration that free banking leads to hard money.

Human Action certainly is not a book you will read over a weekend. It is a classic of economic thought—meant to be the companion of a lifetime. And this munificent new Third Edition (not to be confused with the unfortunate Second Edition widely criticized as a typographical disaster) is in every respect worthy of the greatness of its contents. It merits a place on the bookshelf you reserve for the choicest works in your collection.

Accept This Brand New $15.00 Edition FREE—With Brief Trial Membership in the Conservative Book Club

This new Third Edition of Human Action is wholly revised and updated—the crowning achievement of a lifetime in the service of freedom. The retail price is $15 00, but we’d like to send you a copy as a free gift with your agreement to try a brief membership in the Conservative Book Club. Your sole obligation is to accept just 4 books from about 35 to be offered in the next 18 months—all of them made available to you at deep discounts of 20% to 75%. After that, you may resign at any time.

As a member, you’ll enjoy other benefits and privileges . . . the finest in conservative books to fit every taste . . a free subscription to our monthly Club Bulletin, filled with political and publishing news of particular interest to conservatives. At intervals during your membership there are special services: exclusive Club Omnibus Volumes containing the cream of conservative publishing at immense savings over regular publishers’ prices . . exclusive reports such as the Conservative Survey offered free with membership in this announcement, to name just a few.

The Club Bulletin you receive during your trial membership describes the next Selection and Alternates—all offered at discount, of course. If you decide to accept the Selection, you need do nothing, it will arrive about a month later. If you reject the Selection, you do this in a few seconds by using the handy form always provided.

Try membership! Accept, as a gift, the new $15 00 edition of Human Action—and taste the reading pleasures that CBC members enjoy. Mail Trial Membership form to Conservative Book Club, 81 Centre Avenue, New Rochelle, New York 10801.

LIBERALS OF THE WORLD: UNITE!

Our Hour of Need is upon us. The time is fraught with peril for the most promising development in the non-Western freedom movement—the Arabic Edition of New Individualist Review. Our latest foreign language edition is in grave danger, threatened with extinction by the International Postal Monopoly, the United Nations, and the fine hand of the COMINTERN itself.

To crush the rising tide of revolution which everywhere has followed upon the publication of our SYMPOSIUM ON CONSCRIPTION (last issue), the government of Egypt has launched a drive to deny New Individualist Review’s Arabic edition the free use of international postal services. In the United Nations debate devoted to the issue, the Egyptian Ambassador demanded:

. . . that the United Nations declare the Arabic edition of New Individualist Review to be the greatest threat to peace in the Middle East—stirring discontent among the harmonious Egyptian people and spreading sedition by its challenge of ancient truths. All nations must rise to fight the anarchists, who preach such treason as “Taxes In Money, Not Forced Labor” and “Emigration Before Conscription” and the like. No government is safe; no military force is secure. In Sinai alone, thousands of soldiers left the battlefield with cries of “Freedom Now; Down With Military Servitude!” on the very eve of Israeli attacks. . . .

The United States Ambassador demonstrated the cunning solidarity of all government agents when threatened by the stirrings of liberation. His reply:

We wish to assure the State of Egypt that the Arabic edition of this odious publication—judging by the contents of the English edition—will trouble the peace no longer. The United States government has a great tradition of respect for freedom of speech; as President Johnson once said, “Freedom of Speech is a First Class Freedom.” Of course, this New Individualist Review is mailed third class . .

FRIENDS OF FREEDOM,

You must not fail us!

Subscribe Today!

Vote with your dollars.

The Journal of Law and Economics has been published annually by the University of Chicago Law School since 1958. The growing interest in the law-economics area has suggested that it would be desirable to undertake more frequent publication. It has therefore been decided to increase the issues published each year to two, one to appear in April and the second to appear in October. The new arrangement will start with Volume XI, with the first number of the Volume appearing in April 1968, and the second in October 1968.

All issues of The Journal of Law and Economics may be obtained for the price of $2.50 per issue. However, the Journal is also available at a special student rate of $1.00 per issue. Those students wishing to obtain all volumes of The Journal of Law and Economics issued to date (through Volume X) should remit $10.00.

The subscription rate for the Journal will be $5.00 for two issues each year ($2.00 to students), with the following discounted rates for extended subscriptions: two years, $9.50 (students, $4.00); three years, $13.50 (or $6.00; four years, $17.00 (or $8.00); and five years, $20.00 (or $10.00 to students). Please send orders and remittances (and particulars of student status if you are applying for the student rate) to:

Publications Assistant

The Journal of Law and Economics

University of Chicago Law School

1111 East 60th Street

Chicago, Illinois 60637

Economics from the University of Chicago Press

Studies in Philosophy, Politics, and Economics

Friedrich A. Hayek

These eloquent, vigorous studies voice Hayek’s endeavor to make “the philosophical 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.” His concerns range from the nature of economic theory to the philosophy of David Hume; from the ethical basis of free enterprise to the appeal that socialism has for intellectuals; from the way The Road to Serfdom was received to a critique of The Affluent Society.

1967 LC:18436 356 pages, $6.50

The Economic Life of the Ancient World

Jean-Philippe Lévy

Translated by John G. Biram

Here is a concise, comprehensive, and readable overview of the economic life of the ancient Mediterranean world, tracing the evolution of man’s economic activity from the Greco-Oriental cultures before Alexander to the Fall of Rome. Professor Lévy describes the premonetary states, the advent of money, the growth of commerce, and the social consequences of commercial activity for each of the periods covered. No comparable survey has ever appeared before in English. The material presented is arranged for easy reference.

1967 LC:67-20575 147 pages, $5.00

Public and Private Enterprise

John Jewkes

Here is a fresh approach to the vital subject of the proper roles for private enterprise and government in national economic life. Jewkes argues that economists have failed to perform adequately their function of pointing out the real elements of economic decision that enter into public policy-making. He warns of the dangers of public monopoly and presents the case for the free market. “. . . a witty and penetrating attack on the contemporary mania for socialism, planning, redistribution of income, and other forms of governmental economic controls.”—Henry Hazlitt, National Review.

1967 LC:66-12709 94 pages, $2.25

The Economics of Trade Unions

Albert Rees

Here is a critical look at the impact of unions on wages, prices, employment, productivity, and the distribution of income. An “. . . analysis of trade unions in forthright, lucid, and cogent manner without the usual over-larding of descriptive institutional material or the qualifications besetting most texts.”—Solomon Barkin, Industrial and Labor Relations Review. “. . . a small gem . . . lucid and economical treatment of a large and complex subject.”—American Economic Review. Formerly in the “Cambridge Economic Handbook” series, this book now appears as a Phoenix paperback.

1962 LC:62-9741 208 pages Cloth $3.50, paper $1.50

University of Chicago Press, Chicago 60637

Book Design by JMH Corporation, Indianapolis, Indiana

Typography by Typoservice Corporation, Indianapolis, Indiana

Printed and bound by Edwards Brothers, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan

Home

The Forum

Econlib

The Library

Other Sites

The Library

Return to Title Page for New Individualist Review

The Online Library of Liberty

A project of Liberty Fund, Inc.

Search this Title:

Also in the Library:

NEW BOOKS AND ARTICLES - Ralph Raico, New Individualist Review [1961]

Edition used:

About Liberty Fund: