10
The Roads to Serfdom
By Theodore Dalrymple
The InsIder Fall 05
eople in Britain who lived through state in Britain, called the “five giants on the World War II do not remember it with road to reconstruction”: Want, Disease, Ignoanything like the horror one might have rance, Squalor, and Idleness? expected. In fact, they often remember it as By the time Beveridge published his report the best time of their lives. Even allowing for in 1942, most of the intellectuals of the day the tendency of time to burnish unpleasant assumed that the government, and only the memories with a patina of romance, this is government, could accomplish these desirable extraordinary. The war, after all, was a time goals. Indeed, it all seemed so simple a matter of material shortage, terror, that only the cupidity and and loss: What could posstupidity of the rich could sibly have been good about have prevented these ends Hayek believed that while intelit? from already having been lectuals in modern liberal democThe answer, of course, achieved. The Beveridge racies did not usually have direct is that it provided a powerReport states, for examful existential meaning and access to power, the theories that ple, that want “could have purpose. The population been abolished in Britain they diffused among the populasuffered at the hands of an before the present war” tion ultimately had a profound, easily identifiable external and that “the income enemy, whose evil inten- even determining, influence upon available to the British their society. tions it became the overridpeople was ample for such ing purpose of the whole a purpose.” It was just a nation to thwart. A unified and preeminent matter of dividing the national income cake national goal provided respite from the peace- into more equal slices by means of redistributime cacophony of complaint, bickering, and tive taxation. If the political will was there, social division. And privation for a purpose the way was there; there was no need to worry brings its own content. about effects on wealth creation or any other The war having instantaneously created a adverse effects. nostalgia for the sense of unity and transcenThe growing spirit of collectivism in Britain dent purpose that prevailed in those years, during the war provoked an Austrian economist the population naturally enough asked why who had taken refuge there, F. A. von Hayek, such a mood could not persist into the peace to write a polemical counterblast to the trend: that followed. Why couldn’t the dedication The Road to Serfdom, published in 1944. It of millions, centrally coordinated by the gov- went through six printings in its first year, but ernment—a coordinated dedication that had its effect on majority opinion was, for many produced unprecedented quantities of aircraft years to come, negligible. Hayek believed that and munitions—be adapted to defeat what while intellectuals in modern liberal democraLondon School of Economics head Sir William cies—those to whom he somewhat contemptuBeveridge, in his wartime report on social ser- ously referred as the professional secondhand vices that was to usher in the full-scale welfare dealers in ideas—did not usually have direct access to power, the theories that they diffused among the population ultimately had a profound, even determining, influence upon their This portrait of F.A. von Hayek hangs in the offices of The Heritage Foundation in society. Intellectuals are of far greater imporWashington, D.C. tance than appears at first sight.
Visit Insideronline.org
P
11
1
Hayek was therefore alarmed at the gen- progress of the very kind that we have forgoteral acceptance of collectivist arguments—or ten ever happened. While everyone saw the worse still, assumptions—by British intellectu- misery the Great Depression caused, for examals of all classes. He had seen the process—or ple, few realized that, even so, living standards thought he had seen it—before, in the German- actually continued to rise for the majority. If speaking world from which he came, and he we live entirely in the moment, as if the world feared that Britain would likewise slide down were created exactly as we now find it, we are the totalitarian path. Moreover, at the time he almost bound to propose solutions that bring wrote, the “success” of the even worse problems in two major totalitarian powtheir wake. ers in Europe, Nazi GerIn reaction to the unemCollectivist thinking arose, accordmany and Soviet Russia, ployment rampant in what ing to Hayek , from impatience, a seemed to have justified the W. H. Auden called “the lack of historical perspective, and belief that a plan was neclow dishonest decade” essary to coordinate human before the war, the Bevan arrogant belief that, because we activity toward a conscious- have made so much technological eridge Report suggested ly chosen goal. Against the that it was government’s progress, everything must be suscollectivists, Hayek brought function to maximize powerful—and, to my ceptible to human control. security of income and mind, obvious—arguments employment. This propothat, however, were scarcely new or original. sition was bound to appeal strongly to people Nevertheless, it is often, perhaps usually, more who remembered mass unemployment and important to remind people of old truths than collapsing wages; but however high-minded to introduce them to new ones. and generous it might have sounded, it was Hayek pointed out that the wartime unity wrong. Hayek pointed out that you can’t give of purpose was atypical: In more normal everyone a job irrespective of demand withtimes, people had a far greater, indeed an out sparking severe inflation. And you can infinite, variety of ends, and anyone with the no more protect one group of workers’ wages power to adjudicate among them in the name against market fluctuations without penalizing of a conscious overall national plan, allowing another group than you can discriminate posia few but forbidding most, would exert vastly tively in one group’s favor without discrimimore power than the most bloated plutocrat nating negatively against another. This is so, of socialist propaganda had ever done in a and it is beyond any individual human’s confree-market society. trol that it should be so. Therefore, no amount Collectivist thinking arose, according to of planning would ever make Beveridge’s goals Hayek, from impatience, a lack of histori- possible, however desirable they might be in cal perspective, and an arrogant belief that, the abstract. because we have made so much technologiBut just because a goal is logically imposcal progress, everything must be susceptible sible to achieve does not mean that it must be to human control. While we take material without effect on human affairs. As the history advance for granted as soon as it occurs, we of the twentieth century demonstrates perhaps consider remaining social problems as unprec- better than any other, impossible goals have edented and anomalous, and we propose solu- had at least as great an effect on human existions that actually make more difficult further tence as more limited and possible ones.
The InsIder Fall 05
The most interesting aspect of Hayek’s they go. If the streets are filthy, it is the counbook, however, is not his refutation of collec- cil’s fault. Indeed, if anything is wrong—for tivist ideas—which, necessary as it might have example, my unhealthy diet—it is someone been at that moment, was not by any means else’s fault, and the job of the public power original. Rather, it is his observations of the to correct. Hayek—with the perspective of moral and psychological effects of the col- a foreigner who had adopted England as his lectivist ideal that, 60 years later, capture the home—could perceive a further tendency imagination—mine, at least. that has become much more pronounced Hayek thought he had since then: “There is one observed an important aspect of the change in change in the character moral values brought While everyone saw the misery of the British people, as about by the advance of the Great Depression caused, for a result both of their colcollectivism which at the example, few realized that, even lectivist aspirations and of present time provides spesuch collectivist measures so, living standards actually concial food for thought. It is as had already been legis- tinued to rise for the majority. If that the virtues which are lated. He noted, for examheld less and less in esteem we live entirely in the moment, as ple, a shift in the locus of and which consequently people’s moral concern. if the world were created exactly become rarer are precisely as we now find it, we are almost Increasingly, it was the state those on which the British of society or the world as a people justly prided thembound to propose solutions that whole that engaged their selves and in which they bring even worse problems in moral passion, not their were generally agreed to their wake. own conduct. “It is, howexcel. The virtues posever, more than doubtful sessed by the British peowhether a fifty years’ approach towards col- ple in a higher degree than most other people lectivism has raised our moral standards, or . . . were independence and self-reliance, whether the change has not rather been in the individual initiative and local responsibility . opposite direction,” he wrote. “Though we . . non-interference with one’s neighbour and are in the habit of priding ourselves on our tolerance of the different and queer, respect more sensitive social conscience, it is by no for custom and tradition, and a healthy susmeans clear that this is justified by the prac- picion of power and authority.” tice of our individual conduct.” In fact, “It The British are no longer sturdily indepenmay even be . . . that the passion for collec- dent as individuals, either, and now feel no tive action is a way in which we now without shame or even unease, as not long ago they compunction collectively indulge in that self- would have felt, at accepting government ishness which as individuals we had learnt a handouts. Indeed, 40 percent of them now little to restrain.” receive such handouts: For example, the parThus, to take a trifling instance, it is the ents of every child are entitled not merely to a duty of the city council to keep the streets tax reduction but to an actual payment in cash, clean; therefore my own conduct in this no matter the state of their finances. As for regard is morally irrelevant—which no doubt those who, though able-bodied and perfectly explains why so many young Britons now able to work, are completely dependent on leave a trail of litter behind them wherever the state for their income, they unashamedly
Visit Insideronline.org
1
1
call the day when their welfare checks arrive was published: “The liberty of the individual “payday.” Between work and parasitism they is still believed in, almost as in the nineteenth see no difference. “I’m getting paid today,” century. But this has nothing to do with ecothey say, having not only accepted but thor- nomic liberty, the right to exploit others for oughly internalized the doctrine propounded profit.” in the Beveridge Report, that it is the duty It is depressing to see a man like Orwell of the state to assure everyone of a decent equating profit with exploitation. And it is minimum standard of life regardless of his certainly true that Britain after the war took conduct. The fact of havno heed of Hayek and for ing drawn 16 breaths a a time seemed bent on state minute, 24 hours a day, is control of what were then The effect of collectivist thought sufficient to entitle each of called “the commanding on a capitalist society would not them to his minimum; and heights of the economy.” be socialism, but something quite oddly enough, Hayek saw Not only did the Labour no danger in this and even government nationalize distinct. The means of production endorsed the idea. He did health care, but also coal would remain in private hands, not see that to guarantee mining, electricity and but the state would offer worka decent minimum stangas supply, the railways ers certain benefits, in return for dard of life would demorand public transportation their quiescence and agreement alize not only those who (including the airlines), accepted it, but those who telecommunications, and not to agitate for total expropriaworked in the more menial even most of the car industion as demanded in socialist prooccupations, and whose try. Yet at no time could it paganda. wages would almost ineviremotely be said that Brittably give them a standard ain was slipping down the of living scarcely higher than that of the totalitarian path. decent minimum provided merely for drawing The real danger was far more insidious, breath. and Hayek incompletely understood it. The In any case, Hayek did not quite understand destruction of the British character did not the source of the collectivist rot in Britain. It come from Nazi- or Soviet-style nationalis true, of course, that an individualist society ization or centralized planning, as Hayek needs a free, or at least a free-ish, market; but believed it would. For collectivism proved to a necessary condition is not a sufficient one. be not nearly as incompatible with, or diaIt is not surprising, though, that he should metrically opposed to, a free, or free-ish, have emphasized the danger of a centrally market as he had supposed. The effect of colplanned economy when so prominent a figure lectivist thought on a capitalist society would as Orwell—who was a genuine friend of per- not be socialism, but something quite dissonal liberty, who valued the peculiarities of tinct. The means of production would remain English life, and who wrote movingly about in private hands, but the state would offer such national eccentricities as a taste for racy workers certain benefits, in return for their seaside postcards and a love of public school quiescence and agreement not to agitate for stories—should so little have understood the total expropriation as demanded in socialist preconditions of English personal liberty that propaganda. he wrote, only three years before Hayek’s book The state action that was supposed to lead
The InsIder Fall 05
to the elimination of Beveridge’s five giants of giants. For most of the British population Want, Disease, Ignorance, Squalor, and Idleness today, the notion that people could solve many has left many people in contemporary Britain of the problems of society without governmenwith very little of importance to decide for tal Gleichschaltung, the Nazi term for overall themselves, even in their own private spheres. coordination, is completely alien. They are educated by the state (at least nomiOf course, the majority of Britons are still nally), as are their children in turn; the state not direct dependents of the state. “Only” provides for them in old age and has made sav- about a third of them are: the 25 percent of ing unnecessary or, in some the working population cases, actually uneconomic; who are public employthey are treated and cured ees (the government has Private property and consumerby the state when they are increased them by nearly ism coexist with collectivism, and ill; they are housed by the 1 million since 1997, no freedom for many people now state, if they cannot otherdoubt in order to boost its wise afford decent housing. election chances); and the means little more than choice Their choices concern only 8 percent of the adult popamong goods. The free market, as sex and shopping. ulation either unemployed Hayek did not foresee, has flourNo wonder that the or registered as disabled, ished alongside the collectivism British have changed in and thus utterly dependent that was justified by the need to character, their sturdy indeon government handouts. pendence replaced with But the state looms large eliminate the five giants. passivity, querulousness, or in all our lives, not only in even, at the lower reaches its intrusions, but in our of society, a sullen resentment that not enough thoughts: for so thoroughly have we drunk at has been or is being done for them. For those the wells of collectivism that we see the state at the bottom, such money as they receive is, always as the solution to any problem, never in effect, pocket money, like the money chil- as an obstacle to be overcome. One can gauge dren get from their parents, reserved for the how completely collectivism has entered our satisfaction of whims. As a result, they are soul—so that we are now a people of the govinfantilized. If they behave irresponsibly—for ernment, for the government, by the governexample, by abandoning their own children ment—by a strange but characteristic British wherever they father them—it is because both locution. When, on the rare occasions that our the rewards for behaving responsibly and the Chancellor of the Exchequer reduces a tax, he penalties for behaving irresponsibly have van- is said to have “given money away.” In other ished. Such people come to live in a limbo, in words, all money is his, and whatever we have which there is nothing much to hope or strive in our pockets is what he, by grace and favor, for and nothing much to fear or lose. Private has allowed us. property and consumerism coexist with colOur Father, which art in Downing Street. lectivism, and freedom for many people now . . . means little more than choice among goods. Theodore Dalrymple is a Contributing EdiThe free market, as Hayek did not foresee, tor of City Journal. A version of this article has flourished alongside the collectivism that originally appeared in the Fall 2005 edition of was—and, after years of propaganda, still City Journal. Reprinted with permission from is—justified by the need to eliminate the five City Journal.
Visit Insideronline.org
15