To Rebuild the Ethical Foundation
By Hans F. Sennholz
[The Freeman, Vol. 12 (1962), pp. 90–91
]
Albert Schweitzer, in his Decay and Restoration of Civilization, expressed his hopes for the survival of civilization in the following words:
The renewal of civilization has nothing to do with movements which bear the character of experiences of the crowd; these are never anything but reactions to external happenings. But civilization can only revive when there shall come into being in a number of individuals a new tone of mind independent of the one prevalent among the crowd and in opposition to it, a tone of mind which will gradually win influence over the collective one, and in the end determine its character is only an ethical movement which can rescue us from the slough of barbarism, and the ethical comes into existence only in individuals.
But most men lack character, depth, and stability. Infirm or shaky in our ethical moorings, we are guided by public opinion that is maintained by means of mass communication. Our opinions are shaped by the press, radio, and television — by financial and other considerations. Our understanding of ethical, political, and sociological phenomena is fashioned by hearsay and propaganda, by majority beliefs and decisions.
We like to cling to and identify ourselves with popular labels. In democratic surroundings we are eager to be good democrats. In a socialistic setting we are good socialists; among communists, probably good communists; and among conservatives we strive to be good conservatives.
But no matter what label appears to be the most fashionable, we are prone to attach the prevailing beliefs and prejudices to the label we adopt. If, for instance, we choose the conservative label because it appears fashionable and personally desirable, we tend to interpret it socialistically if the prevailing opinion is socialistic. As a crowd we thus usurp the fashionable labels and pervert them with popular notions and prejudices.
Old venerable terms, such as democratic, liberal, and even American, thus are changed through usurpation and reinterpretation until they now purvey the very opposite of their original meanings.
Lest we become a speck in the crowd of which Schweitzer was speaking we must continuously reexamine the religious and ethical foundation to which we are moored. With unrelenting zeal and scrupulous care we must reorient ourselves always anew toward the ethics we profess. Without the greatest alertness we are bound to sink into the shallowness and instability of the mass.
Hans F. Sennholz (1922–2007) was Ludwig von Mises’s first PhD student in the United States. He taught economics at Grove City College, 1956-1992, having been hired as department chair upon arrival. After he retired, he became president of the Foundation for Economic Education, 1992–1997. He was an adjunct scholar of the Mises Institute and in October, 2004, was awarded the Gary G. Schlarbaum Prize for lifetime defense of liberty. See Lew Rockwell’s tribute.
Thanks to Arlene Oost-Zinner for finding this classic.
{ 6 comments }
Be Alert And Search After the Truth!
Alertness is the key. It is the key to entrepreneurship and entrepreneurship encompasses all aspects of life.
Alertness, when moved from a latent state to an active state, is what underlies the independent investigation of truth.
I venture to say that none of us are perfectly alert in all the various aspects of life. For instance, how many can claim to be alert politically, in commerce, intellectually, and spiritually? The best of ‘men’ are those that exercise degrees of alertness in all aspects of life, followed by those who are alert in some aspects of life or highly alert in one or several aspects of life, followed by those whose alertness is latent.
Alertness combined with principled action is indeed a blessing to mankind. This is what will transform a morbid civilization into a noble one.
Alertness, like many other qualities, reveals itself in various manners. Alertness in ignorance breeds suffering for all involved. Alertness in passion is sometimes good and sometimes bad. Alertness in goodness bodes well for all involved, unless growing pride precipitates a fall. Finally, alertness in pure goodness, promotes one to serving the interests of all by watering the root, in recognition that only by fulfilling the will of the Supreme Person can we do good for all.
What our times call for is a class of men of moral compass, first-class men with the courage to think and act independently. And this class of men must have some mooring in supreme truth. Their guidance must come from above, to be infallible and of benefit for all. Such is the need of our times…indeed of all times.
Led by ungodly men with little intelligence, the planet with all its inhabitants are now suffering under the resulting burden. Economics, political science and law have all enabled men of low character to act in high places. The resulting Babel spewing forth from academia, government and the press serves to confound all but the enlightened and like sheep off to slaughter, the masses go.
Mr Rockwell wrote,
“Finally, I must add that Sennholz has never been shy about insisting on the centrality of ethics in the study of economics. He has decried the welfare state as confiscatory and immoral.”
But his ethical argument against it missed the point and was actually an economic argument in favor of it.
For, if a policy didn’t work, the “ethics†or “morality†of it wasn’t an issue. So, by making an issue of it, he implied that it did work, and freedom didn’t.
What was immoral about it, in his view, was its confiscatory nature. But the point was not that it was immoral but didn’t pay, that taking from the rich to give to the poor didn’t make the poor richer but poorer, and didn’t reduce but increased inequality, and was, therefore, immoral as well as uneconomic by its opponents’ own standards, as well as those of its opponents.
While the purely ethical appeal for freedom is a utilitarian condemnation of it, the economic is an ethical appeal as well, and the strongest possible.
Of course, I meant to say,
immoral as well as uneconomic
By its proponents own standards, as well as those of its opponents.
And, as Mises said, just to the right,
The Quotable Mises
Ludwig von Mises: “Economic interventionism is a self-defeating policy. The individual measures that it applies do not achieve the results sought.” –
Bureaucracy
Mises’ point was not that the policy was immoral but self-defeating, that it brought about the exact opposite result of what as intended, from which it followed that it was immoral by its proponents’ as well as opponents’ standards.
What stronger moral argument could there be?
While I am still in the inflation camp, I have to say that I have been witnessing a lot of anecdotal evidence that would support the deflation scenario. Executive recruiters who used to charge 30% have dropped their prices quite dramatically. A lot of them are “diversifying” into job search counseling and bringing fees down in that sector. A lawyer recently told me that his firm has had to drop his prices by 50%! Small businesses are dropping like flies. Occupancy rates in commercial buildings are sky high in some areas of Charlotte. Rents are dropping dramatically because of people who can’t sell their homes; they are renting them.
It doesn’t help my industry (career and job search counseling) that the government is competing with the private sector by offering free job search advice through multiple venues. Of course, a lot of the help is poorly informed, since the volunteers who are offering free advice are not always well qualified. In addition, it gives people the false sense that they know what they’re doing. The net effect is that they are hurting the people they are trying to help while simultaneously putting out of business the companies who truly can help people to improve their skills and find jobs.
In support of the inflation scenario, it seems that some service providers are trying to maintain revenues by overcharging the customers they do have. This includes the government at all levels, of course, which charges fees and collects taxes from day one from a small business owner who may not make any money for years, if ever.
I will be following the inflation-deflation debate within the Mises community with great interest. It is refreshing to listen to true debate.
Comments on this entry are closed.