I. Introductory

In the age-long advocacy of the vote, virtues have been attributed to it which it does not possess, and evils which have nothing to do with it have been blamed on its absence. But as with the policeman so with the democratic power, age and experience will teach the wisdom of waiting round the corner or on··the other side of the street, until there is at least a reasonable probability that the interposition of authority may be useful, and is more likely to reduce than to increase the commotion or the trouble. From the days of primitive tyrants to the days of civilised autocrats, the individual man has been the bond slave of the State. Can it therefore be won dered at, that having become the master of the 9 10 The Return to Laisser Faire State, he is prone to consider that institution as something in the nature of a bond slave to him. Hence there have arisen numerous and recurring attempts usually labelled "social reform " to make the State provide various forms of sustenance for its citizens. Ever since there was a vote it has been used to " house the working classes," to make the miners life a comfortable one, to provide employ ment and generally to abolish poverty. Th,is movement, slow at first but constantly increasing in ignorance and strength, has reached its zenith in demagogues like Mr. Lloyd George and Mr. Winston Churchill who openly and unashamed offer benefits in exchange for votes, and have so far been able to gain increasing power by blaming the widespread poverty which their quackery produces upon the remnants of sanity that remain with us.

Democracy is also going through the troubles of infancy and adolescence in other ways. With the popular vote the people imagine themselves to be all powerful, but the use of the vote for economic and other purposes to which it is both unsuitable and ineffective, is rapidly shifting the powers and liberties, won at such cost by the people from the autocratic tyrant, to a new class of oppressor more numerous, more secure and, being impersonal, more objectionable, the bureaucratic tyrant. We have yet to learn how to apply the Individual~ ism which secured for us liberty and freedom, to the proper and effective use of those blessings. In the meantime we are the victims of a wave of Col lectivism which having rolled far up the shore of Introductory II civilisation is now happily and naturally on the ebb. The revival of Individualism will be the outstand ing characteristic of the second quarter of the twentieth century. All competent observers are, to some extent at least, agreed about that, and there are at least two good reasons why this prediction should be regarded in the nature rather of a scientific forecast, like a modern weather report, than of mere political prophecy.

There is, first of all, that inexorable arbiter of human affairs called a pendulum, which would sweep us back from all the Socialism and Collectiv ism of the last two or three decades, even if Social ism and Collectivism were, in fact, the blessings which their apostles claim them to be. But the swing of the pendulum will be helped and accelerated in this case by the proven weak nesses of the other course. Individualism as a cause is already firmly established amongst us, al though the movement which bears that name is barely a couple of years old. Individualism is a protest against the modern way of looking at things social and political. It doubts the divine wisdom of the mass; it questions the acceptance of the herd instinct as a safe guide to political perfection; it denies the doctrine of the infallibility of the com mittee. Union is undoubtealy strength when warlike pur poses are afoot, but the application of the proverb to every peaceful purpose is now questioned. Vox populi suprema lex may be a true proverb, it is con12 The Return to Laisser Faire ceivable that the will of the people should be re garded as the highest law, but it is of the gravest import into what way of thinking the people has been guided by its leaders and teachers. People in the mass are notoriously lazy-minded and leave most of their thinking to be done for them by others; hence the power of the Press and of stunt-creators in .general. It is therefore our endeavour in this book to put before them a better alternative to the present commonly accepted doctrine that no man may do an act or think a thought until it has the sanction or the backing of some conference, council, committee, union, association, society, or soviet.

Students of the English language will in later years discover that about the beginning of the year 1927 the word " Individualism" reappeared in the English vocabulary. For a year or more prior to that a little group of political" discontents" met on several occasions to discuss ways and means of deal ing with the Collectivist mania then and now sweep ing through human affairs. The problem was how to revive that sense of personal pride which threatened to desert the English character, of which it is the most precious part, and without which the glorious.history of Britain and of the British Empire would not have been written. That little group, of which I was a member, hesi tated long and thoughtfully before adopting the word" Individualist" as· a label. Strange as it may seem to~day, some of us demurred only as recently as two years ago even to breathe the word.

Introductory It was objected against it that it was harsh, hard, materialistic, out of keeping with the popular notions of service and citizenship, and it was solemnly predicted that any movement so ticketed would be doomed to failure from the start. We played with "Freedom, " "Liberty," "Pros perity," "Life," and "Liberalism," and many other symbols of our dominant thought were mooted. Then we took our courage in both hands, and, in spite of warnings that would have deterred men whose convictions were not so deeply rooted and unshakable, plumped for" Individualism." There are few who can now doubt·that the word is destined once· more in our history ·to ·serve as a weapon of victory, of victory over the forces and influences making for disruption and disintegration in our national life. From the Prime Minister downwards few poli ticians can to-day make a speech without some reference to Individualism. The political leader writer finds himself under the same necessity. The report of the Liberal Industrial Inquiry devotes. a whole chapter to misrepresenting the aims of Individualists. Individualism is once more a live issue with us~ It holds out new hope to a State ridden world, and has brought a patch of blue into the Collectivist-cloud-obscured sky.

Individualism can be considered in various way~. Asa philosophy it seems to me to offer the only chance of satisfaction. I am not of those··who con sider the real aim of life to be happiness, if by hap piness is meant wealth, idleness,something for 14 The Return to Laisser Faire nothing, absence of effort. But if the aim of life is happiness and contentment derived from duty done, then, I argue, through Individualism alone can such an end be reached. Religion, of course, is and must always be essen tially individualistic. No Heaven that I have ever heard of contained a committee. Individualismas a· basis of government is, as I shall hope to show, the only basis upon which the ideal State can be erected. A citizenship which is actuated by Individualism will wash itsliands of that "citizen ship by proxy" which is variously called social reform, Socialism and Communism. All these shibboleths mean paying somebody else with other people's money to .do your duty as a citizen. In the Individualist State each citizen does his own duty-a very different thing.

Individualism as the foundation of a system of economics presents the only prospect of wealth for all. With every individual striving to contribute his utmost to the common stock, the condition of society improves and the standard of living rises. What a contrast to the Collectivist-ruled world where everyone is tempted to deplete the common stock, and society· sinks to ever lower standards! The Individualist is, of course, opposed to Socialism, and he is, therefore, called upon to sup port every anti-Socialist movement. Political organisation, whether Conservative or Liberal, is full of atiti-Socialist societies, all of which are quite good in their way. Much personal satisfaction, however, is not to be derived from a purelx " anti "

,Introductory IS attitude of any kind. Only to be an anti-Socialist is not good enough for a self-respecting person, and that is why we preach the gospel of Indi vidualism. The economic battle has for too long been waged on ground chosen by the enemy: the present posi tion reflects little credit upon Individualis~s and those who think as we do. Some fantastic doctrinaire, lacking in all qualifications for the pur pose, propounds a scheme unassociated with pre cedent or experience, and at once all sorts and classes of sensible people find themselves drawn into a discussion which has no real foothold in common sense, in human experience, in fact or in practice. And yet the foolish theorist. is able to control the platform and keep us all busy debating his eccen tricities. The bankruptcy of modern politics is in no way better shown than by the fact that the first claim of the other parties to support is that they are anti-Socialist. It is impossible to throw mud with out soiling one's own fingers, and so, while modern politicians -are busy rejecting Socialism and de nouncing its follies, even the Conservatives find themselves left with a trifling bill of £300,000,000 a year on account of pensions, doles and other forms of public assistance.

The mud adheres still more noticeably to the modern Liberals, who now bring out an industrial policy stolen complete from the Socialists while piously protesting in every other paragraph that th'ey will never defile themselves with Socialist doctri~e.

16 The Return to Laisser Faire Modern Liberalism may be described as the illegiti mate offspring of Socialism. War, perforce,made us all Socialists. In modern war there is no place for Individualism, which is essentially the gospel of peace. War arises from the undue glorification of the State. The State, when it is the servant of the individual, does not go to war. The State which, like the Kaiser-ridden Germany, the system-ridden Rus'sia or the force ridden Italy, claims the soul of the individual can not avoid war. So perhaps we have some excuse for the Collectivist distemper which still clings to us and holds us back from real peace. The challenge of Individualism is, however, making people think, and when the next General Election comes a very large proportion of the voters will have reached the mental stage in which they can clearly see the two alternatives which face us. Are we to continue the pitiful attemptto erect a State whose sole object is·to act· as wet-nurse to the people, sparing them the painful necessity. of doing anything for themselves, or are we to develop a people who can support and look after themselves as well as the State?

,, We are unlearning," said the Prime Minister at Bewdley, "the· war-time habit of looking to the Government to do everything for us. The Govern ment can lead, guide, help, watch the finances, maintain the defences, but it .cannot do the work that the individual has to do for himself to work out his own salvation, and if I have helped in any way, however feeble, to get that into people's heads I Introductory 17 shall not have lived in vain, because it is that creed, burnt into the bones of Englishmen, that made this country what it has been, and it is only that creed in practice that will enable us in the future to get the country where we all want to keep it, namely, at the top and in the front." There was a time when candidates for Parlia mentary honours were under the necessity of brib ing the electors with their own money. That has all been altered, and now we have the sorry spectacle of Parliamentary candidates bribing the electors with other people's money. So long as the electors remain under the mistaken impression that the ,money comes from a few wealthy taxpayers, so long will the trick be effective, but as soon as electors realise that they themselves are paying the money with which they are bribed, then it will cease to work.

We must get our politics back to questions of principle. There never was such widespread interest in citizenship as exists to-day, yet there never was a time when the principles of citizenship were less discussed and less understood. We fail to see the wood for the trees. We must step back from all the detail~( of· rival policies and strive to think about those great underlying principles upon which alone a successful society and the good life can be established. This is where Individualism comes in. There are two distinct ways of approaching the problem of good government. You can look upon the forty odd millions of human beings who inhabit these 2 18 The Return to Laisser Faire islands as a helpless mass of ignorance, and. there is something to be said for that view. You can decide that they must be regulated, restrained, ordered, restricted, directed and generally provided for . You can reach the conclusion that they do not know how to house themselves, how to find work for them selves, how to provide for their daily needs, or pre pare for their old age, and you can decide that these things must be done through the authority of the State.

That is the Socialist, the Collectivist, view. It is a degrading view, because it is based upon the inherent inefficiency of the mass. It is an illogical view, because it assumes that wisdom, which is lacking in the individual, will· be found in the citizens in the mass. As against all this the Individualist approaches considerations of· government, the problem of providing the good life and the question of the duties of citizenship, from the other end. In dividualism says that either good or bad in the world can only function through the individual, and can function best in a state of liberty. Restraint, regulation, restriction, and all the machinery of government should, therefore, be applied only to the bad. In this manner the maximum of good will prevail. As Cowper puts it: " 'Tis liberty alone Which gives the flower of fleeting life its sweetness and perfume, And we are weeds without it.

All restraint except what wisdom lays on evil men Is evil."

Introductory 19 Government is a negative force. The machinery of government can act most easily as a restraining or preventative force, hut cannot of itself do much that is constructive. So that, while committees with attendant policemen can make arrangements to restrain pickpockets, Collectivist bodieswithaccom panying bureaucrats cannot make arrangements to produce wealth. Thus we get back to principles. We begin to see more clearly the line of cleavage between the Individualist point of view and Collectivist opinion. The former would limit the functions of govern ment to restraining that which is bad, while the latter hopes to use government to produce that which is good. A further line of cleavage can be clearly drawn. Government can be productive of good in such a realm as education, in some departments of health, and in various other ways whic1\ have nothing directly to do with the production of material wealth. But all experience of all time so far proves that when government attempts to make things, to produce things, to create wealth, it fails. Govern ment can create conditions under which the in dividual is able to function to the fullest advantage.

Beyond that it is practically powerless and, in the main, inefficient. The aim therefore which I have in writing this book is to get politics back to principles. I am not concerned as to whether a pension should be 5S., or lOS., or 15s.-the type of petty argument in which the parties now-a-days are involved. I am con20 The Return to Laisser Faire cerned with the principles underlying any pen sion, whatever its size. Individualism says that you cannot pension anybody unless everybody is determined to do his best to do without a penston. Individualism says that the State cannot find em ployment for anybody unless everybody makes a resolute effort to find work for himself, relying on the State only in the last resource. Individualism rejects, not merely'as absurd and degrading but as dangerous and destructive, the theory so sedulously preached by politicians that the State of itself can provide. The peril which menaces us owing to the growing sense of dependence is enormous, and can never be removed until we have developed in the breast of everyone the old spirit of Individualism and independence.

We will have no more of mere anti-Socialism that is to flatter the Socialists. We will have Individualism as a constructive system of life, a philosophy of government. Christianity is not recommended to us on the ground that it is anti heathen; and Individualism must be looked upon as a creed, as a thing which stands by itself, has an existence of its own, anxious to be free from the folly, the stupidity, the meanness of other theories. Popular education has developed a healthy dis content with things as they are, a discontent which is the very seed of future advancement, but a dis content which is not yet wise enough, not yet suffi ciently enlightened, to resist the bait of political Introductory 21 maniacs who, with the gift of the gab or the power of the pen, offer new systems designed ostensibly to bring nearer the millennium, but destined, if accepted, to cause the ruin of millions of innocent but credulous people. There has never yet been any serious effort to educate the people in the why and wherefore of the existing state of things.

Criticism of slums, criticism of poverty, criticism of unnecessary inequalities is good if accompanied by a knowledge of the manner in which houses are built, the manner in which wealth is made, the manner in which trade is conducted. But criticism, like most Socialist criticism, founded upon complete and utter ignorance of these processes, is full of danger and pregnant with disaster. Such criticism has produced the present political chaos. In this book my endeavour will be to do two things for the benefit of students of politics and citizenship. I shall set myself out to discredit S,ocialism, but that is the least worthy and the least inspiring of my aims. I shall do it, if I succeed, not so much by a study and analysis of Socialism, as by a study and explanation of the working of economic laws and the structure of civilised society -the study, in a word, of the science of civilisation and Individualism. I shall write without reference to political party programmes, without reference to election results, and with a sole desire to abide by principles.

My earnest hope is that these pages will be read by that great mass of serious, perplexed electors eager only for the right, unconcerned with party 22 The Return to Laisser Faire labels, but much concerned to see this old country take its proper place once more at the head of the civilised nations of the world. "The worth of a State, in the long run, is the worth of the individuals composing it."