Making Fools of Ourselves; L.E. Read

A mutual nonadmiration society is headed for trouble. For when we acknowledge no great men among us, when we go to the polls and vote for "the lesser of two evils," when by common consent our society is peopled with the unwise, we set the stage for the big, strong, "wise" man who will appoint himself as our ruler-for our own good, of course! Is it that we are so much less wise than our Founding Fathers? In many ways, yes. But not enough to account for the low appraisal we currently have of each other's 255 256 LEONARD E. READ views. It is my contention that we are making fools of ourselves, submitting to and participating in a situation that engenders a bogus ignorance. Unless we are aware of what is bringing this about, corrective steps will be impossible. First~ reflect on the ideal society where government is limited to dispensing that type of protection for every one which each has a moral right to exercise individ ually. Ideally, government has no more authority over or control of creative and productive actions than does a factory guard. Government at its best is but a refinement of guarding against fraud, violence, misrepresentation, predation; it is but the final man-made arbiter of liberty and justice for all-this and nothing more.

Second~ let us take note of a universal characteristic among individuals: no human being is all-knowing. An individual, at best, has no more than a fragment of all knowledge, regardless of how well educated or politically powerful he may be. Furthermore, the notion that any person can synthesize all knowledge, or even approxi mate a synthesis, is utterly absurd. But here is the sig nificant fact: the free society does not require that the individual know all there is to know about everything. If he knows and practices a few simple moral principles and has a mastery of his own profession or trade~ he is adjudged an intelligent man~ able to act intelligently within that tiny orbit which is his. Thus, in a free so ciety, we look for and find numerous individuals who are considered competent within their own frame of experience.

MAKING FOOLS OF OURSELVES 257 Third~ observe what happens to these same individ uals when the ideal, free society disappears and is re placed by democratic collectivism. See how an otherwise intelligent people can give all the appearances of being an ignorant people or how the intelligent people we seek are fogged out, as the saying goes, by an ignorance arti ficial!y created. Formula for Ignorance The formula for an artificial ignorance is simple: Democratically elect, say, one thousand from among our millions of adults, each of the few being of the same stuff as the many, that is, each being reasonably intelligent within his own little orbit but each being only dimly aware that he doesn't know much. Next, transfer in dividual freedom of choice and decision-making from the many to the few. Let the few have power over all aspects of life: how many hours each of the many may work, what wage he shall receive, what and with whom he may exchange, how many acres he may sow and reap, how much wheat or cotton or tobacco or peanuts he may grow, how much of his income he may retain, how his medical care shall be arranged, how his old age is to be secured against the vicissitudes of life, what prices he may charge for his products or services, what value his money shall have, what interest rate or rent he may charge, what areas are permissible for competition, what part of his earnings shall go to relieve who and where and for what, who his enemies are and what wars he must 258 LEONARD E. READ fight,how much he must spend for moon exploration, the businesses and workers and communities and nations he must subsidize, how his children are to be educated, whom he may employ and under what conditions, and so on and on-give the few these powers over the many and the recipe for a bogus mass ignorance is complete. The millions, many of whom would appear intelligent in a free society, will, under democratic collectivism, appear stupid.

Why will many of these millions appear stupid? Be cause under the pressure of "responsible citizenship" they vote for those who would control all aspects of life. Therefore, to vote "intelligently" they must try to know a great deal about all the affairs of-human exis tence that the candidates for rulership-the few-are striv ing to control. In keeping with the theory of democratic collectivism they must be able intelligently to discuss the problems of agriculture, complex monetary affairs, foreign ex change, the gold reserve, backward peoples and under developed countries the world over, labor relations and the ins and outs of collective bargaining, orbital com munication, orbital weather reporting, orbital mapping and orbital warfare, military policy, government educa tion; indeed, a thousand and one other subjects. Put in other terms, they· are trapped into an attempt to explain how socialism can be made to work. Is there a person who can do this? Not being all-knowing but, on the con trary, only infinitessimally knowledgeable, they must ap pear ignorant whenever they wander beyond their own MAKING FOOLS OF OURSELVES 259 tiny realms of knowledge, that is, whenever they pre sume to discuss and pass judgment on problems about which they know nothing at all.

Few of us, even libertarian idealists, when living under democratic collectivism, are able to resist talking about and feigning authoritative judgment on every subject within the domain of the collectivistic rulership. Further, when living in this kind of a society and when taking positions on matters about which we know nothing, our know-nothing positions tend to side with the collectivis tic. Led thus astray, we have no time to understand and practice freedom! Is it any wonder that we appear ig norant to each other?1 The Way Out Is there a way out of this trap? There is, indeed! The way has two ingredients: humility and faith. Humility suggests that each freedom devotee become 1 This does not imply that democratic collectivism is less authoritarian than is the usurped type, as in Russia. But the Russian type does not induce the Russian people to discuss mat ters about which they know nothing. Indeed, they cannot freely discuss all the subjects within their competence. Siberia, not the reputation for ignorance, is the lot of Russians who freely in dulge in dispu tation.

The best instance of an advanced democratic collectivism is to be found in little Uruguay. There they democratically elect not one but nine presidents! And they democratically elect members of the legislature who work around the clock writing the rules of democratic despotism. A country rich in resources and populated by a fine people is now economically strangled, and individual initiative is a quality of the past. But observe the free discussion I Visit Uruguay for a miniature preview of where democratic col lectivism leads a people.

260 LEONARD E. READ conscious of how little he knows and of how little is known by those who would be or are our rulers. From this acute consciousness stems a healthy skepticism: no one knows how to make socialism work. Aware of this we then recognize that organized force (government) has only a strictly negative role to play, that all produc tive and creative actions belong in the realm of men acting freely, privately, voluntarily, competitively, co operatively. Thus fortified, we cannot be drawn into the acceptance of a socialistic premise and, without such an acceptance, we will no longer pontificate on what social istic conduct or procedure should be. If unable to ex plain how freedom can cope with social problems, it is intelligent to confess modestly, "I do not know." Acting in this manner, we will appear no more ignorant to others than we actually are! Nor will we then be inter fering with someone else who does know, or might find an answer. In other words, we'll have faith in freedom faith that man is endowed with wonderful faculties by his Creator, not by the state.

The type of faith required appears difficult to come by -despite the enormous evidence that warrants it. Itis this: When freedom devotees exist in adequate numbers-im pressing one another as men of at least ordinary compe tence-an indescribable catalytic force will bring about a sudden configuration, a coalescence, a merging of their number to replace the democratic collectivism under which we now exist. No individual or committee can plan or mastermind or invent this catalytic force. Strange as it may seem, MAKING FOOLS OF OURSELVES 261 this force is omnipresent like the drawing power of a magnet-and just as mysterious. But as the magnet can not draw sawdust to it but only material of a certain quality, so this force cannot draw people to it except as they exist in a tractable state. Thus, the individual who wishes to witness this phenomenon can do nothing about it except as he makes himself tractable or teachable, ex cept as he unburdens himself of a bogus ignorance, ex cept as he perfects self.

This is not nonsense. On the contrary, it is a hard fact. Patrick Henry made his "give me liberty or give me death" speech scores of times. Nothing happened un til one memorable occasion when this same speech had an electrifying, coalescing effect. Even Henry was un aware that his words were a catalytic force until the mo ment when a certain quality of understanding was achieved by his listeners and, thus, they were drawn into action by the force of his words. The words did not change; the listeners changed! Look to nature or to the market for countless con firmations of this hard fact. For example, a certain molec ular configuration will present itself as a sturdy oak. What is the catalytic force that attends to the mysterious configuration of the molecules? We do not know and, thus, we concede, "Only God can make a tree." Or, take note of how one configuration of infinitely varied creative human energies will show forth as a jet plane, another as a pencil, still another as a symphony, on and on in response to human necessity. Significantly, we do not know what the force is that draws forth and coalesces 262 LEONARD E. READ these creative human energies. There are, though, two things about which we are certain: (1) that the creative human energies must exist in the first place and (2) that they must be unfettered if they are to emerge and coalesce.

We may confidently expect an emerging and a coales cence of intelligent freedom devotees-of those even un known to each other-when each gains that point in un derstanding and exposition where he will be attracted by whatever the indescribable catalytic force is. This force, sometimes referred to as "a voice crying in the wilderness," is always at work, always present. The sole deficiency is in ourselves; this force, to repeat the meta phor, needs something besides sawdust to draw upon. George Washington made a good suggestion: "Let us raise a standard to which the wise and honest can re pair. The event is in the hand of God." Let each of us adhere to such a standard, quit making fools of our selves, and have faith that the event will occur.